Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

From my conversation with Will Storr: Rob Henderson: I think you cited some research suggesting that the Hero’s Journey might not be what audiences are actually responding to. That instead, it might be something like story reversals. Is that right? Will Storr: Yeah, there was a fascinating study where...

robkhenderson's profile picture

Rob Henderson

210,953 subscribers

10,849 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

From my conversation with Will Storr: I was watching the latest Mission Impossible movie and realized the plot was so convoluted it made no sense. And yet, the theater was packed. Everyone was glued to their seats. Part of the appeal is the spectacle—Tom Cruise, in his 60s, doing wild stunts. But what stood out to me is that, at this point, we don’t care much about the plot. We care about Ethan Hunt—and about Tom Cruise playing him. We like him, and we’re just following him through these escalating challenges. Afterward, I thought of something from your book, Will. You argue that character is more important than plot. Can you say more about that? Will Storr: Yeah, that’s central to The Science of Storytelling. It’s about how we can tell better stories by understanding the brain as a storytelling machine. Most traditional guides—like those inspired by Joseph Campbell—focus on plot structure. They break stories into templates: this happens, then that happens. That’s where you get things like the Hero’s Journey. But I wanted to begin with how the mind works. We’re deeply social creatures. Our greatest threats and opportunities are other people, so we’ve evolved to be fascinated by the inner lives of others. That’s why character matters. We’re endlessly curious about what’s really going on inside people. It’s why gossip is universal—one study found it makes up 60% of our conversations, across genders. So I’m not saying character instead of plot, but that great plots often grow out of great characters. Who someone is shapes what they want, the problems they face, and how they respond. Just like in real life.
2:54

From my conversation with Will Storr: I was watching the latest Mission Impossible movie and realized the plot was so convoluted it made no sense. And yet, the theater was packed. Everyone was glued to their seats. Part of the appeal is the spectacle—Tom Cruise, in his 60s, doing wild stunts. But what stood out to me is that, at this point, we don’t care much about the plot. We care about Ethan Hunt—and about Tom Cruise playing him. We like him, and we’re just following him through these escalating challenges. Afterward, I thought of something from your book, Will. You argue that character is more important than plot. Can you say more about that? Will Storr: Yeah, that’s central to The Science of Storytelling. It’s about how we can tell better stories by understanding the brain as a storytelling machine. Most traditional guides—like those inspired by Joseph Campbell—focus on plot structure. They break stories into templates: this happens, then that happens. That’s where you get things like the Hero’s Journey. But I wanted to begin with how the mind works. We’re deeply social creatures. Our greatest threats and opportunities are other people, so we’ve evolved to be fascinated by the inner lives of others. That’s why character matters. We’re endlessly curious about what’s really going on inside people. It’s why gossip is universal—one study found it makes up 60% of our conversations, across genders. So I’m not saying character instead of plot, but that great plots often grow out of great characters. Who someone is shapes what they want, the problems they face, and how they respond. Just like in real life.

Rob Henderson

20,863 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

I’ve been to some creepy houses in my day, most of them were older with structures I never understood. Most of the time I just ignore it, don’t let it bother me, and finish up my stay. Being a ghost hunter it’s hard for me to get too freaked out that I would actually leave. Most of the time I’m just curious why they built it the way they did. This couple is staying an an Airbnb with a finished home in the ceiling of the shower. There is a room in the bedroom that leads to that area but it’s locked off with a sign that says private. Is this like a safe space for the owner or maybe it’s an unfinished area he thought was unsafe? It’s hard to say, but it does peak the imagination on what it could be. Another one I been to was more like a bed and breakfast but it was still listed on Airbnb. What made it creepy to me was it reminded me of the movie The Village, the people there felt so out of place like they were stuck in the early 1900’s it was unsettling how they spoke and how they moved. The house was decorated and finished with allot of wood and allot of carpet like an elderly grandparents home from the 70’s. The whole vibe was like time stood still around this area. For me that’s what made it so eerie. They still used landline phones and old TVs. Maybe it was purposely done like this for nostalgia or for a feeling of coziness. However it wasn’t for me, I wouldn’t stay there again. They didn’t even have WiFi.
1:20

I’ve been to some creepy houses in my day, most of them were older with structures I never understood. Most of the time I just ignore it, don’t let it bother me, and finish up my stay. Being a ghost hunter it’s hard for me to get too freaked out that I would actually leave. Most of the time I’m just curious why they built it the way they did. This couple is staying an an Airbnb with a finished home in the ceiling of the shower. There is a room in the bedroom that leads to that area but it’s locked off with a sign that says private. Is this like a safe space for the owner or maybe it’s an unfinished area he thought was unsafe? It’s hard to say, but it does peak the imagination on what it could be. Another one I been to was more like a bed and breakfast but it was still listed on Airbnb. What made it creepy to me was it reminded me of the movie The Village, the people there felt so out of place like they were stuck in the early 1900’s it was unsettling how they spoke and how they moved. The house was decorated and finished with allot of wood and allot of carpet like an elderly grandparents home from the 70’s. The whole vibe was like time stood still around this area. For me that’s what made it so eerie. They still used landline phones and old TVs. Maybe it was purposely done like this for nostalgia or for a feeling of coziness. However it wasn’t for me, I wouldn’t stay there again. They didn’t even have WiFi.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

241,340 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

DISGUSTING: Joe Rogan: “The more time goes on, the more I’m leaning towards Candace Owens. She’s got some very interesting theories about… I don’t think any story that you hear in the news is accurate. There’s always some spin. And so, whatever the spin is about Tyler Robinson, there’s some bullsh*t to it.” “I don’t know how much of it is bullsh*t, but there’s some bullsh*t. One of the more recent bullsh*ts is they found a photo that they were saying was Tyler Robinson, but then people noticed that the — cause he’s real thin — people noticed that the cars in the background, the proportions were distorted. And then they realized that what they had done was taken a guy who was, like, much wider than Tyler Robinson and shrunken the perspective.” Mark Normand: “Erika Kirk, she’s a kook.”
2:41

DISGUSTING: Joe Rogan: “The more time goes on, the more I’m leaning towards Candace Owens. She’s got some very interesting theories about… I don’t think any story that you hear in the news is accurate. There’s always some spin. And so, whatever the spin is about Tyler Robinson, there’s some bullsh*t to it.” “I don’t know how much of it is bullsh*t, but there’s some bullsh*t. One of the more recent bullsh*ts is they found a photo that they were saying was Tyler Robinson, but then people noticed that the — cause he’s real thin — people noticed that the cars in the background, the proportions were distorted. And then they realized that what they had done was taken a guy who was, like, much wider than Tyler Robinson and shrunken the perspective.” Mark Normand: “Erika Kirk, she’s a kook.”

RedWave Press

287,691 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

“‘Red Rain’ is one of my favourite tracks from that record [‘So’]. It’s a good example of a band playing together with a lot of energy and again, I think from Daniel Lanois’ input, there’s a respect for the moment. So many times in studios you see people desperately trying to get the best possible sound, but they let the moment go because they want to get something right or fixed, or they know that this bit can be improved, but the moment is something instinctively that you feel and if you get that great performance everything else will bow to it. And you can fix a lot of things afterwards. But, if you get the best sound but you don’t get the great performance, you have nothing. And it’s so easy to forget that in the studio.” - PG
1:21

“‘Red Rain’ is one of my favourite tracks from that record [‘So’]. It’s a good example of a band playing together with a lot of energy and again, I think from Daniel Lanois’ input, there’s a respect for the moment. So many times in studios you see people desperately trying to get the best possible sound, but they let the moment go because they want to get something right or fixed, or they know that this bit can be improved, but the moment is something instinctively that you feel and if you get that great performance everything else will bow to it. And you can fix a lot of things afterwards. But, if you get the best sound but you don’t get the great performance, you have nothing. And it’s so easy to forget that in the studio.” - PG

Peter Gabriel

89,226 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

.DONOVAN DIJAK explains to us why he was on his phone during the WWE draft. “Great question. I was tweeting. Here’s the exact breakdown of exactly what happened. First and foremost, I’m texting my wife because it’s a draft, but it’s a real draft, right? So this is my real life and my real job that affects my real income with my real family. My son is right in front of me. It’s not like, ‘Oh, let’s pretend, hey, we’re having fun, fake fighting, fake wrestling.’ It’s like, I’m finding out whether I’m employed on this thing. So it’s important. I’m a person who studies the business. So I read between the lines a lot and I know this is the final night of the draft. I’ve heard rumblings and rumors from people. Basically, I heard rumblings in the company that I might be moving to Monday Night RAW. So I said, ‘Okay, if I’m moving to Monday Night RAW, I know my contract is coming up in three weeks or something at that point, or maybe a little bit more.’ I don’t remember the exact timeline. But I know it’s coming up. I know for a fact that even though the draft is a work, that where they put you is very — symbolic is not the right word, but it shows what they think of you. Carmelo Hayes drafted first because they think highly of him. Somebody else drafted in the second round because they think almost as highly. That part of it is very real.”
4:19

.DONOVAN DIJAK explains to us why he was on his phone during the WWE draft. “Great question. I was tweeting. Here’s the exact breakdown of exactly what happened. First and foremost, I’m texting my wife because it’s a draft, but it’s a real draft, right? So this is my real life and my real job that affects my real income with my real family. My son is right in front of me. It’s not like, ‘Oh, let’s pretend, hey, we’re having fun, fake fighting, fake wrestling.’ It’s like, I’m finding out whether I’m employed on this thing. So it’s important. I’m a person who studies the business. So I read between the lines a lot and I know this is the final night of the draft. I’ve heard rumblings and rumors from people. Basically, I heard rumblings in the company that I might be moving to Monday Night RAW. So I said, ‘Okay, if I’m moving to Monday Night RAW, I know my contract is coming up in three weeks or something at that point, or maybe a little bit more.’ I don’t remember the exact timeline. But I know it’s coming up. I know for a fact that even though the draft is a work, that where they put you is very — symbolic is not the right word, but it shows what they think of you. Carmelo Hayes drafted first because they think highly of him. Somebody else drafted in the second round because they think almost as highly. That part of it is very real.”

Fightful Wrestling

37,588 görüntüleme • 28 gün önce

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”
2:11

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”

Arjun Khemani

23,056 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Me: What the Trump administration is doing by this trolling—by this contempt for standards of evidence, truth, sound argument—is what many dictators have done. Namely, not so much lie, because people can see through lies. But just as Steve Bannon put it, flood the zone with—we're on the radio—so, flood the zone with feces; he didn’t use the word feces. That is, spread so much nonsense, some things that are true, some things that are false, that people just feel there’s no way to tell the difference, and so they just accept what the powerful leader says. That is, you undermine the feeling that there’s any basis to distinguish truth from falsehood. Meaning, well, then what are you going to believe? Well, believe what the leader says. Adam Boulton: And that is, you know, making common knowledge toxic to a certain extent, isn’t it? Me: Yes, it’s spreading the common belief that works in the interests of the powerful leader, the sovereign, the dictator, the chief, at the expense of the democratic principle that the government serves the interests of the people. Adam Boulton: It also seems to me that because America is so dominant and so large, that it is something that is spreading out into political discourse in other countries. You know, people talk about being like Trump, or Trump’s got a point, or things like that. Do you see that coming here? Me: Yeah, I think that is a danger. I mean, I think there were hints of that during the administration of Boris Johnson, who has been called Trump with a thesaurus. But there was some of that trolling, some of that not being quite serious—you never knew whether he was joshing or not—which is less benign than it might seem. It’s not just that he has a sense of humor, but by just fuzzing the border between truth and exaggeration and trolling, it meant that you’re in a position where you may as well believe what the leader says, because the whole atmosphere of knowing has been so polluted that there’s no way of determining what’s true or false. Adam Boulton: It also seems to me—I don’t know if you’d agree—that there’s a tremendous amount of gaslighting, that the fault which Trump or the administration is manifesting, they then accuse their opponents of having. You know, it’s not me, it’s you. Me: Exactly, that kind of naked partisanship: I’m right, people who disagree with me are bad, whatever it is that they say, and I never make a mistake, anything I say is true, is another tactic of control. And indeed, gaslighting—which is like the emperor’s new clothes, the elephant in the room—where people know something privately, but they are punished for saying it publicly, with the result that you can be in a situation where everyone knows something, mistakenly thinks that no one else knows it, whereas everyone really does know it. And that spiral of silence, as it’s sometimes called, can happen when the expression of beliefs is punished. With Adam Boulton of Times Radio (Times Radio):
3:21

Me: What the Trump administration is doing by this trolling—by this contempt for standards of evidence, truth, sound argument—is what many dictators have done. Namely, not so much lie, because people can see through lies. But just as Steve Bannon put it, flood the zone with—we're on the radio—so, flood the zone with feces; he didn’t use the word feces. That is, spread so much nonsense, some things that are true, some things that are false, that people just feel there’s no way to tell the difference, and so they just accept what the powerful leader says. That is, you undermine the feeling that there’s any basis to distinguish truth from falsehood. Meaning, well, then what are you going to believe? Well, believe what the leader says. Adam Boulton: And that is, you know, making common knowledge toxic to a certain extent, isn’t it? Me: Yes, it’s spreading the common belief that works in the interests of the powerful leader, the sovereign, the dictator, the chief, at the expense of the democratic principle that the government serves the interests of the people. Adam Boulton: It also seems to me that because America is so dominant and so large, that it is something that is spreading out into political discourse in other countries. You know, people talk about being like Trump, or Trump’s got a point, or things like that. Do you see that coming here? Me: Yeah, I think that is a danger. I mean, I think there were hints of that during the administration of Boris Johnson, who has been called Trump with a thesaurus. But there was some of that trolling, some of that not being quite serious—you never knew whether he was joshing or not—which is less benign than it might seem. It’s not just that he has a sense of humor, but by just fuzzing the border between truth and exaggeration and trolling, it meant that you’re in a position where you may as well believe what the leader says, because the whole atmosphere of knowing has been so polluted that there’s no way of determining what’s true or false. Adam Boulton: It also seems to me—I don’t know if you’d agree—that there’s a tremendous amount of gaslighting, that the fault which Trump or the administration is manifesting, they then accuse their opponents of having. You know, it’s not me, it’s you. Me: Exactly, that kind of naked partisanship: I’m right, people who disagree with me are bad, whatever it is that they say, and I never make a mistake, anything I say is true, is another tactic of control. And indeed, gaslighting—which is like the emperor’s new clothes, the elephant in the room—where people know something privately, but they are punished for saying it publicly, with the result that you can be in a situation where everyone knows something, mistakenly thinks that no one else knows it, whereas everyone really does know it. And that spiral of silence, as it’s sometimes called, can happen when the expression of beliefs is punished. With Adam Boulton of Times Radio (Times Radio):

Steven Pinker

82,182 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

I didn’t know who Joseph Campbell was until I was 25 or 26. But once I did it changed how I see everything. Read The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Campbell studied myths from every culture on earth — Greek, Buddhist, Native American, Biblical. And underneath all the different costumes and settings he found the same story being told everywhere. He called it the monomyth. It’s about the human psyche and the dragons you have to slay in your own mind to be free. One line from the book that I’ve never forgotten: “The cave you fear to enter holds the treasure you seek.” How many times have we avoided something we desperately wanted because of fear of failure — or fear of success? That’s the hero’s journey. And it’s yours too. Read this book.
2:37

I didn’t know who Joseph Campbell was until I was 25 or 26. But once I did it changed how I see everything. Read The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Campbell studied myths from every culture on earth — Greek, Buddhist, Native American, Biblical. And underneath all the different costumes and settings he found the same story being told everywhere. He called it the monomyth. It’s about the human psyche and the dragons you have to slay in your own mind to be free. One line from the book that I’ve never forgotten: “The cave you fear to enter holds the treasure you seek.” How many times have we avoided something we desperately wanted because of fear of failure — or fear of success? That’s the hero’s journey. And it’s yours too. Read this book.

Anthony Scaramucci

39,974 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Jon Rahm on the LIV format: “Yeah, obviously there’s been a bit of a change. There was a lot more about LIV Golf that was attractive to me, right. Yeah, maybe the format was a set back in the past, but at the same time there’s a lot of positives to it as well. And one of the things that a lot of players kept mentioning is you don’t have a wave weather difference, where you can simply get unlucky and you’re out of contention for that tournament. It’s part of the game, I get it, but it’s something you don’t have to deal with anymore. So that part is a very nice aspect. The team is what really made it for me. Being able to be part of a team, represent a team, play for my teammates, with my teammates and against my teammates, is something that to me that has always been very, very special. When you get a victory to share, it’s always better to have a team to share it with. So it’s what was the most attractive part and when we started discussions it gets to a point where even though I’m ambitious, I’m not greedy. So there’s a give and take and the format is something that I can easily overlook, and I’m pretty sure I can learn to enjoy it, I’ll just have to get used to it, but I’m pretty sure I’ll learn to enjoy it. To be honest, the more I started thinking about it, the more I started thinking about my college days that were 3 day tournaments, 54 holes, and everybody warmed up together for the most part. So it shouldn’t be an environment I’m unfamiliar with.” This is from the LIV podcast called “Fairway to Heaven”. Full link:
4:36

Jon Rahm on the LIV format: “Yeah, obviously there’s been a bit of a change. There was a lot more about LIV Golf that was attractive to me, right. Yeah, maybe the format was a set back in the past, but at the same time there’s a lot of positives to it as well. And one of the things that a lot of players kept mentioning is you don’t have a wave weather difference, where you can simply get unlucky and you’re out of contention for that tournament. It’s part of the game, I get it, but it’s something you don’t have to deal with anymore. So that part is a very nice aspect. The team is what really made it for me. Being able to be part of a team, represent a team, play for my teammates, with my teammates and against my teammates, is something that to me that has always been very, very special. When you get a victory to share, it’s always better to have a team to share it with. So it’s what was the most attractive part and when we started discussions it gets to a point where even though I’m ambitious, I’m not greedy. So there’s a give and take and the format is something that I can easily overlook, and I’m pretty sure I can learn to enjoy it, I’ll just have to get used to it, but I’m pretty sure I’ll learn to enjoy it. To be honest, the more I started thinking about it, the more I started thinking about my college days that were 3 day tournaments, 54 holes, and everybody warmed up together for the most part. So it shouldn’t be an environment I’m unfamiliar with.” This is from the LIV podcast called “Fairway to Heaven”. Full link:

Flushing It

562,908 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

The depth of Elon Musk’s messianic delusions is not fully appreciated. He is a transhumanist eugenicist who thinks humans are a “biological bootloader” for AI. He believes that purging humanity of “inferior races” is crucial to his mission of creating a superintelligence. Musk tells accelerationist fraud Peter Diamandis that humanity will be like an “Iain Banks Culture sort of future.” The Culture is a science fiction series by socialist author Iain M. Banks in which humanity is a kind of pet for giant AIs that control huge spaceships. Humans can change their bodies into almost anything—switch gender, add wings, etc.—and take all the drugs they want. This is the future Musk imagines: Superintelligent AIs that allow a few elites to hang around enjoying “abundance.” The rest of us are nowhere to be found in his vision. His only response to the poors is to just throw money at us—because he says it’s worth nothing anyway. In reality, he will use his unlimited money and power to try to cull the population. He’s already started. MUSK: And I do think we’ll have universal income. We’ll basically just issue money to people and the, really, just because the output of goods and services will so far exceed the money supply. But that, that effectively you have deflation. Because just deflation is just the ratio of the output of goods and services to the money supply. So that’s, so if the rate of growth of goods and services or exceeds the rate of growth of the money supply, which I predict will happen, then you will have deflation. DIAMANDIS: Yes. And a lot of people spinning up new companies, competing against each other, driving the price down and increasing the variability and deflation. Faster and faster. MUSK: Yeah, it’s basically, yeah, AI and robots are going to make so much stuff and provide to many services that they will actually run out of things to do for the humans. They’ll just run out of things to do for the humans. And then they, well, you know, there’s only so much that humans can even express that they want. So you go back to my example of like, if you go a million times greater than the host economy, you’ve long since saturated all human desire. You know, maybe like, if you go a thousand times more than our current economy, thousand times, you probably have already saturated saturated human, anything people can think of that they want. DIAMANDIS: So do you think the value of money is going to significantly decrease? Will it, will we go post capitalist? MUSK: Yeah, I think money will stop being relevant at some point in the future. So just as you’re becoming-- It’s probably something like an Iain Banks Culture sort of future. And I think the AI down the road will really not use human currency. It will just care about power and mass, what is in tonnage? DIAMANDIS: It’s kind of ironic then, right? Just as you’re becoming a multi-trillionaire or money starts to have less value. MUSK: Yeah, pretty much. Yeah, you know, there’s all this stuff. It’s really just truly the interest represents like some percentage ownership in companies that I have, you know, built. And it’s not like sitting in the bank account. It’s just literally, I don’t know, percentage of the companies the companies are doing. Let’s say useful things, the value that company grows. I own a percentage of the companies. And that sums up to that number, which seems high.
3:04

The depth of Elon Musk’s messianic delusions is not fully appreciated. He is a transhumanist eugenicist who thinks humans are a “biological bootloader” for AI. He believes that purging humanity of “inferior races” is crucial to his mission of creating a superintelligence. Musk tells accelerationist fraud Peter Diamandis that humanity will be like an “Iain Banks Culture sort of future.” The Culture is a science fiction series by socialist author Iain M. Banks in which humanity is a kind of pet for giant AIs that control huge spaceships. Humans can change their bodies into almost anything—switch gender, add wings, etc.—and take all the drugs they want. This is the future Musk imagines: Superintelligent AIs that allow a few elites to hang around enjoying “abundance.” The rest of us are nowhere to be found in his vision. His only response to the poors is to just throw money at us—because he says it’s worth nothing anyway. In reality, he will use his unlimited money and power to try to cull the population. He’s already started. MUSK: And I do think we’ll have universal income. We’ll basically just issue money to people and the, really, just because the output of goods and services will so far exceed the money supply. But that, that effectively you have deflation. Because just deflation is just the ratio of the output of goods and services to the money supply. So that’s, so if the rate of growth of goods and services or exceeds the rate of growth of the money supply, which I predict will happen, then you will have deflation. DIAMANDIS: Yes. And a lot of people spinning up new companies, competing against each other, driving the price down and increasing the variability and deflation. Faster and faster. MUSK: Yeah, it’s basically, yeah, AI and robots are going to make so much stuff and provide to many services that they will actually run out of things to do for the humans. They’ll just run out of things to do for the humans. And then they, well, you know, there’s only so much that humans can even express that they want. So you go back to my example of like, if you go a million times greater than the host economy, you’ve long since saturated all human desire. You know, maybe like, if you go a thousand times more than our current economy, thousand times, you probably have already saturated saturated human, anything people can think of that they want. DIAMANDIS: So do you think the value of money is going to significantly decrease? Will it, will we go post capitalist? MUSK: Yeah, I think money will stop being relevant at some point in the future. So just as you’re becoming-- It’s probably something like an Iain Banks Culture sort of future. And I think the AI down the road will really not use human currency. It will just care about power and mass, what is in tonnage? DIAMANDIS: It’s kind of ironic then, right? Just as you’re becoming a multi-trillionaire or money starts to have less value. MUSK: Yeah, pretty much. Yeah, you know, there’s all this stuff. It’s really just truly the interest represents like some percentage ownership in companies that I have, you know, built. And it’s not like sitting in the bank account. It’s just literally, I don’t know, percentage of the companies the companies are doing. Let’s say useful things, the value that company grows. I own a percentage of the companies. And that sums up to that number, which seems high.

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

178,762 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

I can tell almost instantly when I meet a young man or woman, whether he or she is a deep thinker. They may not be at the top of their class, but that doesn’t necessarily make them less intelligent than the kid who scored 1500 on his SAT or the guy with an IQ of 134. They may be more intelligent. Much more intelligent, but the methods we have for quantifying that intelligence do not adequately capture the breadth and depth of brilliant minds that exist in the world. So they go unrecognized while the kids who excel on answer-based examinations get the best grades, attend the best schools, earn the best degrees, and, more often than not, go on to have mediocre lives. Why? There is one thing that the most brilliant and accomplished people I have ever met all share in common, and it isn’t pedigree or IQ. It’s curiosity. And not just any curiosity—it’s the inexhaustible kind. It’s the kind that will never be satisfied. In my experience, this is the sort of curiosity that breeds humility and most often coincides with a questions-based mindset. And it’s this type of mindset, not the answers-based mindset our educational system selects for, that is the actual prerequisite for brilliance. I’ve seen this kind of brilliance in physical therapists, plumbers, and pretty much any profession you can imagine that we don’t typically associate with brilliance. But we do associate it with excellence. And that’s because to become excellent at something, you have to become your own teacher. This means going from learning how to give the right answers to learning how to ask the right questions. And that requires curiosity and an almost psychotic commitment to excellence. So, while the person in this video is correct that less intelligent people than he are far more successful than he has been, the more interesting and less remarked upon insight is that people like him are not as brilliant as the system tells us they are.
1:02

I can tell almost instantly when I meet a young man or woman, whether he or she is a deep thinker. They may not be at the top of their class, but that doesn’t necessarily make them less intelligent than the kid who scored 1500 on his SAT or the guy with an IQ of 134. They may be more intelligent. Much more intelligent, but the methods we have for quantifying that intelligence do not adequately capture the breadth and depth of brilliant minds that exist in the world. So they go unrecognized while the kids who excel on answer-based examinations get the best grades, attend the best schools, earn the best degrees, and, more often than not, go on to have mediocre lives. Why? There is one thing that the most brilliant and accomplished people I have ever met all share in common, and it isn’t pedigree or IQ. It’s curiosity. And not just any curiosity—it’s the inexhaustible kind. It’s the kind that will never be satisfied. In my experience, this is the sort of curiosity that breeds humility and most often coincides with a questions-based mindset. And it’s this type of mindset, not the answers-based mindset our educational system selects for, that is the actual prerequisite for brilliance. I’ve seen this kind of brilliance in physical therapists, plumbers, and pretty much any profession you can imagine that we don’t typically associate with brilliance. But we do associate it with excellence. And that’s because to become excellent at something, you have to become your own teacher. This means going from learning how to give the right answers to learning how to ask the right questions. And that requires curiosity and an almost psychotic commitment to excellence. So, while the person in this video is correct that less intelligent people than he are far more successful than he has been, the more interesting and less remarked upon insight is that people like him are not as brilliant as the system tells us they are.

Demetri Kofinas

76,349 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

“When people were saying in the testimony, that the hope they have is that what happened here 30 something years ago will never happen again. It won’t, not because those who were responsible for that dark past will not try again or are not even trying now again. It will not happen again just because there will be people who will stand up and fight. It’s not because there are fewer people who wish for us to perish or who would have wished for this country to disappear. How can people accept that? What kind of people do not stand up and fight? There is a risk of dying when you stand up and fight but if you don’t, it’s a sure thing: you are going to die. So why don’t I try to stand up and fight with the chance that I might survive and live life as I want it, instead of giving up and you let people treat you as if for you to live, it is a favour that they are going to do for you. Why? But my message goes to other Africans who live like this on a daily basis, who are dehumanized and they accept it and they beg. I can't beg to live. I can't beg anybody. We’ll fight, If I lose, I lose. But there is a chance. There is a chance, a significant chance, that if you stand up and fight, you will live. And you will have lived a dignified life that you deserve, that anybody else deserves." President Kagame | #Kwibuka31
4:30

“When people were saying in the testimony, that the hope they have is that what happened here 30 something years ago will never happen again. It won’t, not because those who were responsible for that dark past will not try again or are not even trying now again. It will not happen again just because there will be people who will stand up and fight. It’s not because there are fewer people who wish for us to perish or who would have wished for this country to disappear. How can people accept that? What kind of people do not stand up and fight? There is a risk of dying when you stand up and fight but if you don’t, it’s a sure thing: you are going to die. So why don’t I try to stand up and fight with the chance that I might survive and live life as I want it, instead of giving up and you let people treat you as if for you to live, it is a favour that they are going to do for you. Why? But my message goes to other Africans who live like this on a daily basis, who are dehumanized and they accept it and they beg. I can't beg to live. I can't beg anybody. We’ll fight, If I lose, I lose. But there is a chance. There is a chance, a significant chance, that if you stand up and fight, you will live. And you will have lived a dignified life that you deserve, that anybody else deserves." President Kagame | #Kwibuka31

Presidency | Rwanda

47,115 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

SemiAnalysis' Jordan Nanos reveals the OpenAI engineers scrolling their own kernel code had no idea what it did line by line, and it didn't matter because the AI does "It's not slop, because it performs, but it's literally just AI-generated assembly basically puked out in Gluon, this low-level kernel programming language that they built on top of Triton, which uses this really interesting programming model." "The point is, the guys who were scrolling through this code with us, it was kind of clear that they know a whole bunch about hardware, they know a whole bunch about the concepts in the system, and they just have no idea what this MLA kernel that they're showing us for DeepSeek actually does." "You can go line by line and it's like nope, nope, nope." "But it doesn't matter. The AI understands it, the AI tests it, and you see the results. It produces correct kernels that perform really well." "And I think this is just a sign of what's to come again." "That actual code is not necessarily something that a human has to reason about deeply, if the AI knows how to manipulate the data movement and the processing elements on the hardware that you've given it." ________ More takeaways from OpenAI's Jalapeno development:
1:11

SemiAnalysis' Jordan Nanos reveals the OpenAI engineers scrolling their own kernel code had no idea what it did line by line, and it didn't matter because the AI does "It's not slop, because it performs, but it's literally just AI-generated assembly basically puked out in Gluon, this low-level kernel programming language that they built on top of Triton, which uses this really interesting programming model." "The point is, the guys who were scrolling through this code with us, it was kind of clear that they know a whole bunch about hardware, they know a whole bunch about the concepts in the system, and they just have no idea what this MLA kernel that they're showing us for DeepSeek actually does." "You can go line by line and it's like nope, nope, nope." "But it doesn't matter. The AI understands it, the AI tests it, and you see the results. It produces correct kernels that perform really well." "And I think this is just a sign of what's to come again." "That actual code is not necessarily something that a human has to reason about deeply, if the AI knows how to manipulate the data movement and the processing elements on the hardware that you've given it." ________ More takeaways from OpenAI's Jalapeno development:

Fireside Alpha

4,519,456 görüntüleme • 15 gün önce

Rory McIlroy was asked if he’s okay with/understands that they may water between waves on Thursday and Friday. Provided an interesting nugget about Shinnecock watering every day at 2 p.m. for members. “It’s a unique golf course,” McIlroy said. “The members at Shinnecock will tell you they do that every single day—every single day at this course the members play they put water on the course at 2 p.m. So, it’s a unique golf course and it seems like it’s just something they have to do. “For me it’s more... my concern was you don’t want it to look as if you’ve lost the golf course, and you’re starting to put water on it, which I don’t think is what they’re going to do. I think, especially with the heaviness of the wind on Thursday, it’s probably prudent to do that. “Friday doesn’t look as windy, but I think just for, again, fairness and competitive integrity, they do it on Friday, too. But I think they’ve got enough bandwith on the weekend that they probably don’t need to do it. So, I understand it. When I first heard of it my first reaction was ‘that’s stupid, why are they doing that?’ But then once you actually listened and you let them break it down to you, you’re like, yeah, that makes sense.”
1:19

Rory McIlroy was asked if he’s okay with/understands that they may water between waves on Thursday and Friday. Provided an interesting nugget about Shinnecock watering every day at 2 p.m. for members. “It’s a unique golf course,” McIlroy said. “The members at Shinnecock will tell you they do that every single day—every single day at this course the members play they put water on the course at 2 p.m. So, it’s a unique golf course and it seems like it’s just something they have to do. “For me it’s more... my concern was you don’t want it to look as if you’ve lost the golf course, and you’re starting to put water on it, which I don’t think is what they’re going to do. I think, especially with the heaviness of the wind on Thursday, it’s probably prudent to do that. “Friday doesn’t look as windy, but I think just for, again, fairness and competitive integrity, they do it on Friday, too. But I think they’ve got enough bandwith on the weekend that they probably don’t need to do it. So, I understand it. When I first heard of it my first reaction was ‘that’s stupid, why are they doing that?’ But then once you actually listened and you let them break it down to you, you’re like, yeah, that makes sense.”

Christopher Powers

1,341,845 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

This couple is having a wedding that will reflect who they are. They openly don’t seem to care if anyone will actually go or not. I think weddings are a celebration for everyone to join in for a special day. But I also think that offending guests before they even go might be a decision that will turn in a decision full of regret. So here’s my take on this. The way I see it is that they are going to be disappointed. I know others might argue and say that it’s selfish for the guests to not go because of the conditions set forth by the bride and groom, however it goes both ways. If they know guests won’t like the conditions of the wedding, then maybe they should compromise a little. I think they should give people options. I feel that this is going to show the bride and groom who is actually their real friends and who aren’t in their eyes. They won’t care if the guests don’t like the wedding rules, they are going to expect them to go because they think that their attendance shows that they care and that they are local.
3:03

This couple is having a wedding that will reflect who they are. They openly don’t seem to care if anyone will actually go or not. I think weddings are a celebration for everyone to join in for a special day. But I also think that offending guests before they even go might be a decision that will turn in a decision full of regret. So here’s my take on this. The way I see it is that they are going to be disappointed. I know others might argue and say that it’s selfish for the guests to not go because of the conditions set forth by the bride and groom, however it goes both ways. If they know guests won’t like the conditions of the wedding, then maybe they should compromise a little. I think they should give people options. I feel that this is going to show the bride and groom who is actually their real friends and who aren’t in their eyes. They won’t care if the guests don’t like the wedding rules, they are going to expect them to go because they think that their attendance shows that they care and that they are local.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

300,719 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

In 4 minutes, Kurt Vonnegut explained stories better than anyone I’ve ever heard. “The shape of the curve is what matters. Not their origins.” He plots stories on 2 axes: X: Time Y: Good fortune / ill fortune He goes on to say, “Somebody gets into trouble, then gets out of it again. People love that story. They never get tired of it.” Point 1: Stories have defined patterns. In Joseph Campbell’s Hero of a Thousand Faces, he makes the case for the Hero’s Journey. Since then, it’s become the most famous storytelling structure in the world. Vonnegut argued stories could be divided into 8 shapes. Each story, he said, fit one of the 8. Point 2: Vonnegut says, “Be a sadist. No matter how sweet and innocent your leading characters, make awful things happen to them — so the reader may see what they're made of.” To see who your characters really are, you have to make them suffer. Only then does your audience have someone worth cheering for. Point 3: End on a high note. Vonnegut says, “It’s not accidental that the line ends up higher than where it began. This is encouraging to readers.” The way a story makes people feel when they finish is how they remember it. It’s called recency bias. Lift people up and they will love you. *** “There are people. There are stories. The people think they shape the stories, but the reverse is often closer to the truth.” I wrote this with Robbie Crabtree. Follow him for lessons on storytelling + fundraising. And I talk about creative storytelling. Follow Nathan Baugh for more like that.
4:00

In 4 minutes, Kurt Vonnegut explained stories better than anyone I’ve ever heard. “The shape of the curve is what matters. Not their origins.” He plots stories on 2 axes: X: Time Y: Good fortune / ill fortune He goes on to say, “Somebody gets into trouble, then gets out of it again. People love that story. They never get tired of it.” Point 1: Stories have defined patterns. In Joseph Campbell’s Hero of a Thousand Faces, he makes the case for the Hero’s Journey. Since then, it’s become the most famous storytelling structure in the world. Vonnegut argued stories could be divided into 8 shapes. Each story, he said, fit one of the 8. Point 2: Vonnegut says, “Be a sadist. No matter how sweet and innocent your leading characters, make awful things happen to them — so the reader may see what they're made of.” To see who your characters really are, you have to make them suffer. Only then does your audience have someone worth cheering for. Point 3: End on a high note. Vonnegut says, “It’s not accidental that the line ends up higher than where it began. This is encouraging to readers.” The way a story makes people feel when they finish is how they remember it. It’s called recency bias. Lift people up and they will love you. *** “There are people. There are stories. The people think they shape the stories, but the reverse is often closer to the truth.” I wrote this with Robbie Crabtree. Follow him for lessons on storytelling + fundraising. And I talk about creative storytelling. Follow Nathan Baugh for more like that.

Nathan Baugh

6,249,766 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce