Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Going long never looked so good. 🇺🇸 - PSA JAKL-10 .308 - Aimpoint, Inc. Macro P-2 - Vortex Optics Razor - Badger Ordnance Condition One scope mount - One Hundred Concepts lens cover

palmettoarmory's profile picture

Palmetto State Armory

230,517 subscribers

18,726 views • 8 days ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

My Girlfriend asked why I was smiling at 5 AM. Showed her the terminal. "What are all those green numbers?" $1,237. Made while she slept. "Doing what?" Nothing. Claude scanned 21,500 wallets, found 52 that never lose, built a bot that copies them. She watched for 10 seconds: +$5.17 captured +$7.12 captured +$16.31 captured "It just keeps going?" Every few seconds. New line. New money. "How much did you start with?" $200. Now $1,437. Eleven hours. Asleep. "What does it do?" Buys at $0.49. Sells at $0.54. Pockets $0.05. Who wins doesn't matter. "That's legal?" Citadel does this on NYSE daily. 500 engineers. I have one screen. She looked at the P&L curve. Never dips. Just climbs. "Can you make me one?" Setting hers up now. She still doesn't get how it works. The bot doesn't care. You only need Claude + laptop + 1 hour/day. Giving This Free for 24 hours. To get it: 1. Comment the word 'CLAUDE' 2. Like and Retweet this post 3. Follow me Shelpid.WI3M (so i can DM you)
0:30

My Girlfriend asked why I was smiling at 5 AM. Showed her the terminal. "What are all those green numbers?" $1,237. Made while she slept. "Doing what?" Nothing. Claude scanned 21,500 wallets, found 52 that never lose, built a bot that copies them. She watched for 10 seconds: +$5.17 captured +$7.12 captured +$16.31 captured "It just keeps going?" Every few seconds. New line. New money. "How much did you start with?" $200. Now $1,437. Eleven hours. Asleep. "What does it do?" Buys at $0.49. Sells at $0.54. Pockets $0.05. Who wins doesn't matter. "That's legal?" Citadel does this on NYSE daily. 500 engineers. I have one screen. She looked at the P&L curve. Never dips. Just climbs. "Can you make me one?" Setting hers up now. She still doesn't get how it works. The bot doesn't care. You only need Claude + laptop + 1 hour/day. Giving This Free for 24 hours. To get it: 1. Comment the word 'CLAUDE' 2. Like and Retweet this post 3. Follow me Shelpid.WI3M (so i can DM you)

Shelpid.WI3M

23,721 views • 4 months ago

Jeff Bezos looked at a government waiting room and priced it at a hundred billion dollars. Bezos: “This is a $100 billion business, by the way. This is huge business.” That number is not ambition. It is a measurement. A company that size does not create a hundred billion dollars of new value here. It recovers a hundred billion that is already being destroyed, on schedule, in public, by a process everyone has agreed to call normal. The size of the opportunity is the size of the wound. Bezos: “They almost always say yes, they just make you wait a long time.” So the verdict was never in question. Only the delivery date. Which means the months bought nothing. They were storage. Your project sat in a room while the word yes waited its turn to be said. Nobody in there was deciding. Someone was scheduling. And the room bills by the day. Suarez: “The daily carrying cost, one day of interest, 200 to $400,000 per day.” Now find the recipient. There isn’t one. No school funded, no inspector paid, no safety review performed. A tax at least moves money into someone’s hands. This deletes it at four hundred thousand a day, and every dollar was real before the queue touched it. Bezos: “And that doesn’t count the frustration.” Count it anyway. It lands on a body long before it lands on a spreadsheet. Suarez: “Which is infinite. I have some white hairs as a result of this stuff.” That is the invoice. The money has a rate. The rest gets charged to the man, and he pays it whether the answer comes back yes or no. No one has ever been refunded a year. Every other cost in this economy can be hedged, insured, refinanced, or written off. Waiting is the only one that is final. A man will forgive being told no. He will never get back the time he spent standing there waiting to be told yes. We built a civilization that can move a decision at the speed of light and still schedule it at the speed of a man’s hair turning white. Bezos: “It should give you a yes or a no in 10 seconds. And if the answer is no, it should tell you the 6 things you have to change to get a yes.” For four thousand years the wait was honest. Someone had to hold the entire code in one head and walk it line by line against your drawings. Reading was slow because reading was human. That stopped being true in less time than it takes to approve one building. Bezos: “Maybe with AI it can just read all the plans. And it knows all the codes. Spit it out.” The constraint is gone. The wait stayed. Anything still moving at the old speed after the cost of thinking collapsed is not slow. It is choosing. The queue never protected you from a bad building. It protected a signature from a bad outcome. Nobody gets fired for the wait. They get fired for the answer. An institution has no lifespan, so time costs it nothing. You have one, so time is the only thing it can take. Every queue is a trade between something that dies and something that doesn’t, and only one side is ever charged. That trade held for the whole of recorded history because the mortal side had no leverage. It does now. Somebody is going to build this. A hundred billion does not sit in a waiting room forever. And the day it exists, the wait stops being a fact of the world and becomes a decision with a name attached. The hundred billion was never the prize. It is the receipt for how long we agreed to stand there. We are the first people alive who get to stop signing it.
1:55

Jeff Bezos looked at a government waiting room and priced it at a hundred billion dollars. Bezos: “This is a $100 billion business, by the way. This is huge business.” That number is not ambition. It is a measurement. A company that size does not create a hundred billion dollars of new value here. It recovers a hundred billion that is already being destroyed, on schedule, in public, by a process everyone has agreed to call normal. The size of the opportunity is the size of the wound. Bezos: “They almost always say yes, they just make you wait a long time.” So the verdict was never in question. Only the delivery date. Which means the months bought nothing. They were storage. Your project sat in a room while the word yes waited its turn to be said. Nobody in there was deciding. Someone was scheduling. And the room bills by the day. Suarez: “The daily carrying cost, one day of interest, 200 to $400,000 per day.” Now find the recipient. There isn’t one. No school funded, no inspector paid, no safety review performed. A tax at least moves money into someone’s hands. This deletes it at four hundred thousand a day, and every dollar was real before the queue touched it. Bezos: “And that doesn’t count the frustration.” Count it anyway. It lands on a body long before it lands on a spreadsheet. Suarez: “Which is infinite. I have some white hairs as a result of this stuff.” That is the invoice. The money has a rate. The rest gets charged to the man, and he pays it whether the answer comes back yes or no. No one has ever been refunded a year. Every other cost in this economy can be hedged, insured, refinanced, or written off. Waiting is the only one that is final. A man will forgive being told no. He will never get back the time he spent standing there waiting to be told yes. We built a civilization that can move a decision at the speed of light and still schedule it at the speed of a man’s hair turning white. Bezos: “It should give you a yes or a no in 10 seconds. And if the answer is no, it should tell you the 6 things you have to change to get a yes.” For four thousand years the wait was honest. Someone had to hold the entire code in one head and walk it line by line against your drawings. Reading was slow because reading was human. That stopped being true in less time than it takes to approve one building. Bezos: “Maybe with AI it can just read all the plans. And it knows all the codes. Spit it out.” The constraint is gone. The wait stayed. Anything still moving at the old speed after the cost of thinking collapsed is not slow. It is choosing. The queue never protected you from a bad building. It protected a signature from a bad outcome. Nobody gets fired for the wait. They get fired for the answer. An institution has no lifespan, so time costs it nothing. You have one, so time is the only thing it can take. Every queue is a trade between something that dies and something that doesn’t, and only one side is ever charged. That trade held for the whole of recorded history because the mortal side had no leverage. It does now. Somebody is going to build this. A hundred billion does not sit in a waiting room forever. And the day it exists, the wait stops being a fact of the world and becomes a decision with a name attached. The hundred billion was never the prize. It is the receipt for how long we agreed to stand there. We are the first people alive who get to stop signing it.

Dustin

17,035 views • 25 days ago

#JANHAE #JANIVERSE space #1 pt.2 - why she decided to get her styes removed ☹️💜 🦊: i went to the hospital; i was mentally ok at that time. when i went to the hospital and waited for the doctor. at first, i was going to go the same place [i normally go], but the doctor was fully booked there. so i switched to another hospital, but i had also been to this one too. there were a lot of people too, so i went back here and got a slot. i waited for the doctor 🦊: once i saw the doctor, they asked, “let me take a look at your eye.” they then checked by flipping my eyelid over and looking at it. they were like, “oh here! i see it here! there seems to be two [styes].” i was like, “right, doctor? i also saw two.” because i could see them at the edge of my eye, like there were swollen bumps. the doctor was like, “wow you’re so good! how did you see them? you flipped your eyelids and looked at them yourself?” then they continued checking for a while and showed me pictures. they said, “here! what i’m seeing is right here” which were actually inside my eye 🦊: everyone! people who have had a stye might know what that is, but people who have never had one before - it’s the inside of your eyelid. when you flip your upper eyelid, you’ll see something like pus there. and there were two spots. i was shocked at that time. i asked the doctor “so what should i do?” the doctor said there were two options. if i was afraid of needles, then take medicine. but if i wasn’t scared, then get it surgically removed 🦊: then in my mind, “i’ve never had procedures in this area. what should i do?” honestly, i wanted to get it over with. and [i also thought] how [serious] the prcoedure would be, because the last time i had one, the doctor just… i thought it was already the procedure. it was just pricking the oil glands, but that one got better and went down, right? so i thought it was something like that and would get better, like a little more than this. i didn’t think it was going to be serious. so i said i wasn’t afraid of needles, but i also asked how long it would take before getting better, in terms of the wound, or if i could wear makeup 🦊: they said, “well, i would want you to give it about a week before you wear makeup. on the inside, it might take around 2 weeks for the wound to get better. so cut back on wearing contact lenses for now.” i thought, “wow so long! but does that mean the procedure would be bigger than the one i did with pricking?” at that time, i still thought what they did was a surgery. so i was like, “the procedure was bigger than the one i did?” 🦊: so i started to think, “nope, i can’t do it,” and said, “then what if i take medicine instead, doctor?” the doctor said, “it might go down if you take medicine. but it might still come back up again. i don’t know when it might swell up again. if you take medicine, it might only temporarily suppress it.” so i opened up my work schedule. i didn’t dare to risk and let it swell up during don’t know when, everyone! do you get it? 🦊: after this, i still have more back-to-back work. and the doctor also recommended that it would be better to get it removed through procedures. so i decided, “ok, i’ll have the procedure.”
4:04

#JANHAE #JANIVERSE space #1 pt.2 - why she decided to get her styes removed ☹️💜 🦊: i went to the hospital; i was mentally ok at that time. when i went to the hospital and waited for the doctor. at first, i was going to go the same place [i normally go], but the doctor was fully booked there. so i switched to another hospital, but i had also been to this one too. there were a lot of people too, so i went back here and got a slot. i waited for the doctor 🦊: once i saw the doctor, they asked, “let me take a look at your eye.” they then checked by flipping my eyelid over and looking at it. they were like, “oh here! i see it here! there seems to be two [styes].” i was like, “right, doctor? i also saw two.” because i could see them at the edge of my eye, like there were swollen bumps. the doctor was like, “wow you’re so good! how did you see them? you flipped your eyelids and looked at them yourself?” then they continued checking for a while and showed me pictures. they said, “here! what i’m seeing is right here” which were actually inside my eye 🦊: everyone! people who have had a stye might know what that is, but people who have never had one before - it’s the inside of your eyelid. when you flip your upper eyelid, you’ll see something like pus there. and there were two spots. i was shocked at that time. i asked the doctor “so what should i do?” the doctor said there were two options. if i was afraid of needles, then take medicine. but if i wasn’t scared, then get it surgically removed 🦊: then in my mind, “i’ve never had procedures in this area. what should i do?” honestly, i wanted to get it over with. and [i also thought] how [serious] the prcoedure would be, because the last time i had one, the doctor just… i thought it was already the procedure. it was just pricking the oil glands, but that one got better and went down, right? so i thought it was something like that and would get better, like a little more than this. i didn’t think it was going to be serious. so i said i wasn’t afraid of needles, but i also asked how long it would take before getting better, in terms of the wound, or if i could wear makeup 🦊: they said, “well, i would want you to give it about a week before you wear makeup. on the inside, it might take around 2 weeks for the wound to get better. so cut back on wearing contact lenses for now.” i thought, “wow so long! but does that mean the procedure would be bigger than the one i did with pricking?” at that time, i still thought what they did was a surgery. so i was like, “the procedure was bigger than the one i did?” 🦊: so i started to think, “nope, i can’t do it,” and said, “then what if i take medicine instead, doctor?” the doctor said, “it might go down if you take medicine. but it might still come back up again. i don’t know when it might swell up again. if you take medicine, it might only temporarily suppress it.” so i opened up my work schedule. i didn’t dare to risk and let it swell up during don’t know when, everyone! do you get it? 🦊: after this, i still have more back-to-back work. and the doctor also recommended that it would be better to get it removed through procedures. so i decided, “ok, i’ll have the procedure.”

²²

23,674 views • 15 days ago

They tell you to fear the BULLY. Nobody warns you about the CHARMER. The dangerous one was never the man you boo. It's the man you CHEER. The people's champion. The warm smile you never look past. So look closer. Behind it sits an investigation into children being raped, switched off on his watch. 97 suspects. Walked free. And he wants to run the country. You think Starmer's bad? They're handing you worse, dressed as better. A friendly face, a northern accent, 25 years of buried scandals behind him. CHANGE, he keeps saying. Yet no one in politics has changed more. He's a CHAMELEON. Blairite under Blair. Hard left to chase Corbyn, then sat in his shadow cabinet anyway. People's champion today, because that's what sells today. Twenty-five years. Every position going. Never once a thing changed for YOU. Only to climb high, and this is his THIRD reach for the top. He lost in 2010. Lost again in 2015. And here he is, clawing back for one more go. It was never about serving you. It was always about the climb. He even named his politics. MANCHESTERISM. Not Blairite, not Brownite, not soft left. A flag with nothing on it, because a man who stands for nothing can never be pinned to anything. Immigration? He says he's heard you. That's the trick. Every time tougher enforcement came to a vote, he voted AGAINST it. He's called migration a simple good. He fought to make it EASIER to stay, not harder. He hasn't changed his mind. He's changed his act. Know what you're sold. A man FURTHER LEFT than Starmer. Read that again. More tax. More spend. More borrowing. His own voters say he'd march us back into the EU. Everything you voted to leave, handed back with that same warm smile. He's a COMPASS with the NEEDLE TORN OUT. Looks the part. Points wherever you turn him. Tells you NOTHING true. Not a way out. The same CAGE, friendlier paint. Because through all the changing, one thing NEVER changes. Who he protects. And it was never you. STAFFORD. 1,200 dead. Not from illness. From NEGLECT. Left in their own filth, some so thirsty they drank from flower vases, dying behind curtains while nobody came. He fought to keep the lid ON. Resisted the public inquiry. Decided the truth would do more harm than good. A minister looked at 1,200 dead and decided you were better off not knowing. The families fought him for YEARS to drag it into the light. OPERATION AUGUSTA. 2005. Men grooming and raping children across Manchester. Kids as young as TWELVE, in care, nobody coming for them. 97 suspects. 57 child victims. Then, SHUT DOWN. Not for lack of officers, they had a THOUSAND spare. They had the names. They had the children telling them what was being done to their bodies. Three charged. The rest walked. EIGHT abused again. The records naming who buried it? GONE. And the minister over it all, smiling at you now, calling himself your CHANGE? Andy Burnham. An investigation into child rape. Closed. And the man meant to be responsible for that city wants to be Prime Minister. Victoria Agoglia. Fifteen. In care. She told them a grown man was injecting her with heroin. Said it out loud. They heard her and did nothing. She died. Her family still waiting for an apology that never comes. One man won't let it stay buried. Raja Miah, an MBE who once advised government on safeguarding children, six years demanding a public inquiry. He says it was a cover up dressed as accountability. Survivors shut out. The powerful protected. He’s begged Burnham to face him. Burnham won’t. Happy for any camera that flatters him, gone when it matters. Ask yourself why. So here he is. The charmer. The change. Look past the smile, just once. Stafford. Augusta. Victoria. A trail of the failed, the buried and the dead, 25 years long. He changes his politics, his party, his face for the cameras. Never the one thing that mattered. Who he protects and it was NEVER you. They'll call him the change. He's the one thing in British politics that never changes.
6:21

They tell you to fear the BULLY. Nobody warns you about the CHARMER. The dangerous one was never the man you boo. It's the man you CHEER. The people's champion. The warm smile you never look past. So look closer. Behind it sits an investigation into children being raped, switched off on his watch. 97 suspects. Walked free. And he wants to run the country. You think Starmer's bad? They're handing you worse, dressed as better. A friendly face, a northern accent, 25 years of buried scandals behind him. CHANGE, he keeps saying. Yet no one in politics has changed more. He's a CHAMELEON. Blairite under Blair. Hard left to chase Corbyn, then sat in his shadow cabinet anyway. People's champion today, because that's what sells today. Twenty-five years. Every position going. Never once a thing changed for YOU. Only to climb high, and this is his THIRD reach for the top. He lost in 2010. Lost again in 2015. And here he is, clawing back for one more go. It was never about serving you. It was always about the climb. He even named his politics. MANCHESTERISM. Not Blairite, not Brownite, not soft left. A flag with nothing on it, because a man who stands for nothing can never be pinned to anything. Immigration? He says he's heard you. That's the trick. Every time tougher enforcement came to a vote, he voted AGAINST it. He's called migration a simple good. He fought to make it EASIER to stay, not harder. He hasn't changed his mind. He's changed his act. Know what you're sold. A man FURTHER LEFT than Starmer. Read that again. More tax. More spend. More borrowing. His own voters say he'd march us back into the EU. Everything you voted to leave, handed back with that same warm smile. He's a COMPASS with the NEEDLE TORN OUT. Looks the part. Points wherever you turn him. Tells you NOTHING true. Not a way out. The same CAGE, friendlier paint. Because through all the changing, one thing NEVER changes. Who he protects. And it was never you. STAFFORD. 1,200 dead. Not from illness. From NEGLECT. Left in their own filth, some so thirsty they drank from flower vases, dying behind curtains while nobody came. He fought to keep the lid ON. Resisted the public inquiry. Decided the truth would do more harm than good. A minister looked at 1,200 dead and decided you were better off not knowing. The families fought him for YEARS to drag it into the light. OPERATION AUGUSTA. 2005. Men grooming and raping children across Manchester. Kids as young as TWELVE, in care, nobody coming for them. 97 suspects. 57 child victims. Then, SHUT DOWN. Not for lack of officers, they had a THOUSAND spare. They had the names. They had the children telling them what was being done to their bodies. Three charged. The rest walked. EIGHT abused again. The records naming who buried it? GONE. And the minister over it all, smiling at you now, calling himself your CHANGE? Andy Burnham. An investigation into child rape. Closed. And the man meant to be responsible for that city wants to be Prime Minister. Victoria Agoglia. Fifteen. In care. She told them a grown man was injecting her with heroin. Said it out loud. They heard her and did nothing. She died. Her family still waiting for an apology that never comes. One man won't let it stay buried. Raja Miah, an MBE who once advised government on safeguarding children, six years demanding a public inquiry. He says it was a cover up dressed as accountability. Survivors shut out. The powerful protected. He’s begged Burnham to face him. Burnham won’t. Happy for any camera that flatters him, gone when it matters. Ask yourself why. So here he is. The charmer. The change. Look past the smile, just once. Stafford. Augusta. Victoria. A trail of the failed, the buried and the dead, 25 years long. He changes his politics, his party, his face for the cameras. Never the one thing that mattered. Who he protects and it was NEVER you. They'll call him the change. He's the one thing in British politics that never changes.

BanksyCat

137,807 views • 2 months ago

[🫧] 260308 Hongjoong - ‘👋’, TOKTOQ pop live from Sydney, p.2: 🐿 About doing the morning broadcast with Seonghwa? (morning shows in Australia) Right, so it ended up being the two of us doing it together, and honestly speaking about studying English? I’m not really studying it super deeply and consistently, but whenever I have time I try to do it in various ways. I also practice conversation with a teacher and things like that. Actually, it feels different from that and from listening to the anchors during a live broadcast. Listening to announcers speak is different, so rather than being nervous, I actually went into it in a state of intense focus. So that’s how I approached it. 🐿️ Actually, Seonghwa is also usually really good at English, but since normally the two of us, as the eldest representatives, were the ones going out there, things that came to mind might suddenly not come to mind in that moment. When that happens, honestly it’s the same for both me and Seonghwa. Before going in we practiced quite a lot. For this question - how should I call it? - we prepared expected questions, like predicted questions, and went in with those prepared. Some things came out within the range of those expected questions, and there were also modified ones, so I just handled those kind of freestyle. Seonghwa also prepared a lot. 🐿 Actually, this is how I see it. Since English isn’t our native language either, we can be inexperienced, but what I want is to show that we’re gradually improving, even if it’s just little by little. And honestly, even if we can’t do it one hundred percent, as long as the meaning is conveyed, people understand it. Before, I used to think that while having confidence was important, I also had a strong desire to not make mistakes and to deliver everything perfectly. But now I think it’s better not to hold back and just speak, though I try to be careful about situations where it could be mistranslated. So that’s how it is with English for me. I think it’s kind of like this: even if you’ve been promoting for a long time, when you use Korean, then Japanese, then English, sometimes it feels like your skill level resets. I plan to keep working at it consistently. That’s something I want to keep putting effort into. Yes, that’s how it is.
3:31

[🫧] 260308 Hongjoong - ‘👋’, TOKTOQ pop live from Sydney, p.2: 🐿 About doing the morning broadcast with Seonghwa? (morning shows in Australia) Right, so it ended up being the two of us doing it together, and honestly speaking about studying English? I’m not really studying it super deeply and consistently, but whenever I have time I try to do it in various ways. I also practice conversation with a teacher and things like that. Actually, it feels different from that and from listening to the anchors during a live broadcast. Listening to announcers speak is different, so rather than being nervous, I actually went into it in a state of intense focus. So that’s how I approached it. 🐿️ Actually, Seonghwa is also usually really good at English, but since normally the two of us, as the eldest representatives, were the ones going out there, things that came to mind might suddenly not come to mind in that moment. When that happens, honestly it’s the same for both me and Seonghwa. Before going in we practiced quite a lot. For this question - how should I call it? - we prepared expected questions, like predicted questions, and went in with those prepared. Some things came out within the range of those expected questions, and there were also modified ones, so I just handled those kind of freestyle. Seonghwa also prepared a lot. 🐿 Actually, this is how I see it. Since English isn’t our native language either, we can be inexperienced, but what I want is to show that we’re gradually improving, even if it’s just little by little. And honestly, even if we can’t do it one hundred percent, as long as the meaning is conveyed, people understand it. Before, I used to think that while having confidence was important, I also had a strong desire to not make mistakes and to deliver everything perfectly. But now I think it’s better not to hold back and just speak, though I try to be careful about situations where it could be mistranslated. So that’s how it is with English for me. I think it’s kind of like this: even if you’ve been promoting for a long time, when you use Korean, then Japanese, then English, sometimes it feels like your skill level resets. I plan to keep working at it consistently. That’s something I want to keep putting effort into. Yes, that’s how it is.

Irene | AhgaTiny

130,351 views • 5 months ago

251207 Hongjoong, TOKTOQ pop live, p.2-2: 🐿️ Honestly, after we renewed our contracts and the eight of us started going to award shows again, I kept having these thoughts. Today they said AAA is celebrating its 10th anniversary, and it made me think - rather than wishing that in 10 years we’ll still be performing and receiving awards, what I really hope for is that even then we’ll be a group ready to perform, and ATINY will be ready to happily enjoy our stage. If that’s the case, I couldn’t ask for anything more. 🐿️ I’m not crying (laughs) I’m not crying - but… yeah. That’s how I feel. 🐿 It’s been that way since I was young, it’s that way now, and I think it’ll still be that way even as I get older and gain more years in this career. The year-end award shows we attend - and the music shows too - they will never be something we can take for granted. They’ll never become something that just naturally happens. Because of that, I try to cherish those moments and do my best every time. 🐿 As for what I said on stage… the acceptance speeches… honestly, even if I prepare 100 times or 200 times, I can never say everything I want to. I regret it every time, especially with award speeches. I always think, ‘It would be nice if I could sound excited, or say something witty, or say something that really carries my feelings.’ But every time I come down, I wonder, ‘Did I only say really surface-level things?’ Even when I prepare a special sentence in my heart, once I go up there, it just doesn’t come out the way I hoped. 🐿️ Today there were so many winners, so it didn’t feel right to make the acceptance speeches too long. And when I received the award alone, I gave the speech - but honestly, I didn’t know I was going to receive that one at all. 🐿️ Really, every award show has its own way of announcing and presenting awards, but for AAA specifically, we truly don’t know anything until the moment we hear it. We don’t know when we’ll be called, we don’t know if we’ll get anything - we genuinely have no idea. So at first, when they said ‘ATEEZ,’ we all stood up together. And this time, we had planned that if we received a second award, I would give the acceptance speech. 🐿️ Ah - it was the third one, right? Yes, the third. So originally, Wooyoungie was supposed to speak, then I would do the next one, but Mingi said he had something he really wanted to say, so we decided Mingi should go first. And I said that if there was another chance later, I’d do it then. Thankfully, we did receive a third award. So when they said ‘ATEEZ,’ I had my words prepared - but then they said ‘ATEEZ’s Hongjoong,’ and my mind just went completely blank. And after that… well, I just did it.
4:35

251207 Hongjoong, TOKTOQ pop live, p.2-2: 🐿️ Honestly, after we renewed our contracts and the eight of us started going to award shows again, I kept having these thoughts. Today they said AAA is celebrating its 10th anniversary, and it made me think - rather than wishing that in 10 years we’ll still be performing and receiving awards, what I really hope for is that even then we’ll be a group ready to perform, and ATINY will be ready to happily enjoy our stage. If that’s the case, I couldn’t ask for anything more. 🐿️ I’m not crying (laughs) I’m not crying - but… yeah. That’s how I feel. 🐿 It’s been that way since I was young, it’s that way now, and I think it’ll still be that way even as I get older and gain more years in this career. The year-end award shows we attend - and the music shows too - they will never be something we can take for granted. They’ll never become something that just naturally happens. Because of that, I try to cherish those moments and do my best every time. 🐿 As for what I said on stage… the acceptance speeches… honestly, even if I prepare 100 times or 200 times, I can never say everything I want to. I regret it every time, especially with award speeches. I always think, ‘It would be nice if I could sound excited, or say something witty, or say something that really carries my feelings.’ But every time I come down, I wonder, ‘Did I only say really surface-level things?’ Even when I prepare a special sentence in my heart, once I go up there, it just doesn’t come out the way I hoped. 🐿️ Today there were so many winners, so it didn’t feel right to make the acceptance speeches too long. And when I received the award alone, I gave the speech - but honestly, I didn’t know I was going to receive that one at all. 🐿️ Really, every award show has its own way of announcing and presenting awards, but for AAA specifically, we truly don’t know anything until the moment we hear it. We don’t know when we’ll be called, we don’t know if we’ll get anything - we genuinely have no idea. So at first, when they said ‘ATEEZ,’ we all stood up together. And this time, we had planned that if we received a second award, I would give the acceptance speech. 🐿️ Ah - it was the third one, right? Yes, the third. So originally, Wooyoungie was supposed to speak, then I would do the next one, but Mingi said he had something he really wanted to say, so we decided Mingi should go first. And I said that if there was another chance later, I’d do it then. Thankfully, we did receive a third award. So when they said ‘ATEEZ,’ I had my words prepared - but then they said ‘ATEEZ’s Hongjoong,’ and my mind just went completely blank. And after that… well, I just did it.

Irene | AhgaTiny

34,880 views • 8 months ago

Driving Gloves And The Spreadsheet That Conquered the World And Vanished In October 1979, weeks after VisiCalc shipped as the very first electronic spreadsheet for the Apple II, I was already teaching it in offices across New Jersey. Just a punk kid talking to suits No connections, no inside track just a me with the original disks and a room full of wide-eyed accountants who had never seen anything like it. Then, on the week Lotus 1-2-3 officially launched January 26, 1983, I walked into Computerland of Somerville as their external trainer. Snow on the ground, radiators hissing, and executives from some of New Jersey’s biggest companies treating every @ function and macro like sacred knowledge. I trained them on Release 1 straight out of the box. They all believed they were building something permanent. Back then, the spreadsheet was supposed to be the ultimate moat. Wall Street analysts, CIOs, and tech prophets declared it the forever business. Lotus was the killer app that sold the IBM PC. Profits looked eternal. No one, not a single person I trained, not a single expert writing in the trade press would have believed you if you said that one day nobody would care what brand of spreadsheet they used. “Good enough” was good enough? They would have laughed you out of the room. Yet that is exactly what happened. By the late 1980s Lotus had doubled down with Release 3. It was a technological leap 3D worksheets, better graphics, rewritten in C but it came at a steep price. The list price was $495, more than $1,330 in today’s dollars. And that was just the software. To run it “all in” you needed a high-end 286 or 386 PC, a hard disk, and at least 2 MB of RAM, hardware that typically cost $3,000 to $6,000 in 1989 (roughly $8,000 to $16,000 in today’s dollars). The full setup per workstation easily pushed the total investment to $4,000–$7,000 back then, or well over $10,000–$19,000 when adjusted for inflation. Companies paid it because they thought the moat was permanent. They were wrong. Microsoft Excel arrived: good enough, and perfectly timed with the Windows boom. Then came cheaper competitors, open-source, cloud spreadsheets, and finally free, ubiquitous options baked into every laptop and phone. The “spreadsheet market” as a distinct, high-margin category simply evaporated. Today, no one under forty even thinks about it. It’s infrastructure, like electricity or paper. Invisible. Commodity. The brand name that once defined an entire industry is a footnote. Look around your life right now and you’ll see the same pattern everywhere. We are not surrounded by the absolute best products, nor by the absolute cheapest. We are surrounded by the good enough ones that won. The operating system on your phone, the video app you use, the note-taking tool you open every day, none of them are perfect, but they are accessible, cheap or free, and they spread like wildfire until they became the default. That is precisely where we are headed with artificial intelligence. The smartest voices today insist AGI and ASI will remain scarce, proprietary, and eternally profitable. They talk about intelligence as the ultimate moat. I smile when I hear it because I’ve lived this exact story before, on those freezing mornings in Somerville, New Jersey. Coding AIs like Claude (or whatever comes next) will soon be so common, so freely available, and so embedded in everything that no one will pay premium prices for them, just as no one pays premium prices for spreadsheets anymore. The intelligence layer will become generic. Cheap. Everywhere. Invisible. “Good enough” always wins. History doesn’t repeat, but it rhymes and the rhyme this time is going to rewrite every industry, including the one that thinks it’s building the final, unassailable moat. The spreadsheet taught us that lesson the hard way. The AI era is about to teach it again, only faster. This video is peak 1980s vibe, remember to put on your driving gloves…
9:09

Driving Gloves And The Spreadsheet That Conquered the World And Vanished In October 1979, weeks after VisiCalc shipped as the very first electronic spreadsheet for the Apple II, I was already teaching it in offices across New Jersey. Just a punk kid talking to suits No connections, no inside track just a me with the original disks and a room full of wide-eyed accountants who had never seen anything like it. Then, on the week Lotus 1-2-3 officially launched January 26, 1983, I walked into Computerland of Somerville as their external trainer. Snow on the ground, radiators hissing, and executives from some of New Jersey’s biggest companies treating every @ function and macro like sacred knowledge. I trained them on Release 1 straight out of the box. They all believed they were building something permanent. Back then, the spreadsheet was supposed to be the ultimate moat. Wall Street analysts, CIOs, and tech prophets declared it the forever business. Lotus was the killer app that sold the IBM PC. Profits looked eternal. No one, not a single person I trained, not a single expert writing in the trade press would have believed you if you said that one day nobody would care what brand of spreadsheet they used. “Good enough” was good enough? They would have laughed you out of the room. Yet that is exactly what happened. By the late 1980s Lotus had doubled down with Release 3. It was a technological leap 3D worksheets, better graphics, rewritten in C but it came at a steep price. The list price was $495, more than $1,330 in today’s dollars. And that was just the software. To run it “all in” you needed a high-end 286 or 386 PC, a hard disk, and at least 2 MB of RAM, hardware that typically cost $3,000 to $6,000 in 1989 (roughly $8,000 to $16,000 in today’s dollars). The full setup per workstation easily pushed the total investment to $4,000–$7,000 back then, or well over $10,000–$19,000 when adjusted for inflation. Companies paid it because they thought the moat was permanent. They were wrong. Microsoft Excel arrived: good enough, and perfectly timed with the Windows boom. Then came cheaper competitors, open-source, cloud spreadsheets, and finally free, ubiquitous options baked into every laptop and phone. The “spreadsheet market” as a distinct, high-margin category simply evaporated. Today, no one under forty even thinks about it. It’s infrastructure, like electricity or paper. Invisible. Commodity. The brand name that once defined an entire industry is a footnote. Look around your life right now and you’ll see the same pattern everywhere. We are not surrounded by the absolute best products, nor by the absolute cheapest. We are surrounded by the good enough ones that won. The operating system on your phone, the video app you use, the note-taking tool you open every day, none of them are perfect, but they are accessible, cheap or free, and they spread like wildfire until they became the default. That is precisely where we are headed with artificial intelligence. The smartest voices today insist AGI and ASI will remain scarce, proprietary, and eternally profitable. They talk about intelligence as the ultimate moat. I smile when I hear it because I’ve lived this exact story before, on those freezing mornings in Somerville, New Jersey. Coding AIs like Claude (or whatever comes next) will soon be so common, so freely available, and so embedded in everything that no one will pay premium prices for them, just as no one pays premium prices for spreadsheets anymore. The intelligence layer will become generic. Cheap. Everywhere. Invisible. “Good enough” always wins. History doesn’t repeat, but it rhymes and the rhyme this time is going to rewrite every industry, including the one that thinks it’s building the final, unassailable moat. The spreadsheet taught us that lesson the hard way. The AI era is about to teach it again, only faster. This video is peak 1980s vibe, remember to put on your driving gloves…

Brian Roemmele

26,130 views • 3 months ago

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

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

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

212,796 views • 2 months ago

Brian Preston and Bo Hanson on when financial advisors actually make sense: Asked whether anyone should hire a financial advisor if investing is "really as simple as just buying an index fund consistently," they push back on the framing itself. "Buying an index fund is just one part of the financial planning process. It's the investment part." They're quick to admit that most people don't need to pay a professional: "We don't think that everyone needs a financial advisor with all the information out there on podcasts and YouTube channels and books and blogs. There's so much great free information out there that a lot of people can self-manage for a long time." So when does hiring an advisor actually make sense? They break it down into three specific scenarios: 1. The gravity of your decisions becomes uncomfortable. "If I make a 10% mistake on $10,000, it's not going to change my life. If I make a 10% mistake on a million dollars, well, now I'm starting to impact my livelihood. Now, that might be more than I save in a year, more than I make in a year." 2. Your life becomes financially complicated. "You used to have a two-page tax return and now you have a 100-page tax return or you might have options and RSUs and ESP or you are wondering about what your estate documents should look like… You're an expert in your field in your vocation but you don't know all the financial planning stuff." 3. You have the smarts but not the time. "Maybe you're super super smart and you can do it on your own. And the complexity doesn't even really frighten you, but what you found is you just don't have time to put the energy and effort and attention into it that you would like to. And so naturally, because you have all these other things going on, personal finances falls on the back burner." The common thread? Clients reach out wanting a second set of eyes from someone who has navigated their next stage many times before: "I want someone who's done it a hundred times so they can tell me, 'Hey, what are the things to look out for? What are the pitfalls I should have?'" But if you're early in your career, the advice is refreshingly direct: "It's not super complicated to figure out, hey, I need to make a good income, live on less than I make, follow the financial order of operations, put my money to work, and every dollar that I can save is going to be way more valuable going into my portfolio or funding my financial goals than paying a financial advisory fee."
2:29

Brian Preston and Bo Hanson on when financial advisors actually make sense: Asked whether anyone should hire a financial advisor if investing is "really as simple as just buying an index fund consistently," they push back on the framing itself. "Buying an index fund is just one part of the financial planning process. It's the investment part." They're quick to admit that most people don't need to pay a professional: "We don't think that everyone needs a financial advisor with all the information out there on podcasts and YouTube channels and books and blogs. There's so much great free information out there that a lot of people can self-manage for a long time." So when does hiring an advisor actually make sense? They break it down into three specific scenarios: 1. The gravity of your decisions becomes uncomfortable. "If I make a 10% mistake on $10,000, it's not going to change my life. If I make a 10% mistake on a million dollars, well, now I'm starting to impact my livelihood. Now, that might be more than I save in a year, more than I make in a year." 2. Your life becomes financially complicated. "You used to have a two-page tax return and now you have a 100-page tax return or you might have options and RSUs and ESP or you are wondering about what your estate documents should look like… You're an expert in your field in your vocation but you don't know all the financial planning stuff." 3. You have the smarts but not the time. "Maybe you're super super smart and you can do it on your own. And the complexity doesn't even really frighten you, but what you found is you just don't have time to put the energy and effort and attention into it that you would like to. And so naturally, because you have all these other things going on, personal finances falls on the back burner." The common thread? Clients reach out wanting a second set of eyes from someone who has navigated their next stage many times before: "I want someone who's done it a hundred times so they can tell me, 'Hey, what are the things to look out for? What are the pitfalls I should have?'" But if you're early in your career, the advice is refreshingly direct: "It's not super complicated to figure out, hey, I need to make a good income, live on less than I make, follow the financial order of operations, put my money to work, and every dollar that I can save is going to be way more valuable going into my portfolio or funding my financial goals than paying a financial advisory fee."

Big Brain Investing

15,169 views • 4 months ago

Revel Founder & CEO Scott Morton spent 9 years working at SpaceX / Starship for Elon Musk: Biggest lesson? "Elon Musk is really good at is asking engineers to go further than they otherwise would have." i.e. Push past the first “no.” - Avoid incremental thinking. - Question every requirement & constraint. - Force one more round of thinking. - Breakthroughs often follow discomfort. Ref: Walter Isaacson's Biography on Elon: “1. Question every requirement. Each should come with the name of the person who made it. You should never accept that a requirement came from a department, such as from “the legal department” or “the safety department.” You need to know the name of the real person who made that requirement. Then you should question it, no matter how smart that person is. Requirements from smart people are the most dangerous, because people are less likely to question them. Always do so, even if the requirement came from me. Then make the requirements less dumb. 2. Delete any part or process you can. You may have to add them back later. In fact, if you do not end up adding back at least 10% of them, then you didn’t delete enough. 3. Simplify & optimize. This should come after step two. A common mistake is to simplify and optimize a part or a process that should not exist. 4. Accelerate cycle time. Every process can be speeded up. But only do this after you have followed the first three steps. In the Tesla factory, I mistakenly spent a lot of time accelerating processes that I later realized should have been deleted. 5. Automate. That comes last. The big mistake in Nevada and at Fremont was that I began by trying to automate every step. We should have waited until all the requirements had been questioned, parts and processes deleted, and the bugs were shaken out.” . . . Scott Morton (Scott Morton) Founder & CEO of Revel (Revel.io) "Oh man, I have so many stories. But actually, there’s a good one here. I think what Elon’s really good at is asking engineers to go further than they otherwise would have. One of the most interesting examples was the first orbital flight of Starship. We had this maneuver to separate the booster from the ship. We called it the “twig snap.” It essentially looked like a twig snapping in space, and it was a very inefficient way to do it. For the next flight, he was like, “We’re going to do hot staging,” which is where you literally start the Starship engines while it’s still connected to the booster and just blast off. Coming out of that, we all thought, “Okay, cool. We’re going to do the same exact conceptual operations for the next flight. Of course. We’re just going to go nail it this time, right?” And he was like, “No, we’re going to do hot staging on the next flight.” I was actually sitting outside. I wasn’t in the Elon meeting, but I was outside. I saw everyone walk out, and they were all just like, “Oh my God. How are we going to do this?” That week, screenshots started getting shot around. I’m sure everyone was thinking, “Oh, this is going to be really difficult.” But then, throughout the course of the week, some really awesome ideas started coming up. It started to look more and more feasible. Then it became, “How would you manufacture this? How would this all go together?” They ended up inventing, just out of nowhere, a new stage that would sit between the booster and the ship called the hot stage. It would take the blast, and then it would get ejected on reentry for the booster. It worked first shot. That’s insane. I just remember the vibes at SpaceX were like, “Oh my… how in the hell are we going to go do this?” But I think the big lesson there, and something I’ve pulled forward to Revel, is that when engineers come to you and say, “Hey, we just can’t get this to work. This is not possible,” you push them and say, “Well, why don’t you spend two more days thinking about it? Let’s see what comes up. And if nothing, we’ll think about it then.” Engineers really underestimate their ability to creatively problem-solve and come up with new ideas they otherwise never would have thought of when they’re presenting what they think is possible in the moment. I’ll say, “Okay.” They’ll say, “This just isn’t working. We don’t think this is a path.” And I’ll say, “Okay, let’s spend one more day thinking about it.” Oftentimes, there’ll be some breakthrough that no one saw coming. I don’t know how someone hasn’t made a movie about this. There are just so many stories. I mean, early Starship, back in the Hopper days, it was like…"
2:54

Revel Founder & CEO Scott Morton spent 9 years working at SpaceX / Starship for Elon Musk: Biggest lesson? "Elon Musk is really good at is asking engineers to go further than they otherwise would have." i.e. Push past the first “no.” - Avoid incremental thinking. - Question every requirement & constraint. - Force one more round of thinking. - Breakthroughs often follow discomfort. Ref: Walter Isaacson's Biography on Elon: “1. Question every requirement. Each should come with the name of the person who made it. You should never accept that a requirement came from a department, such as from “the legal department” or “the safety department.” You need to know the name of the real person who made that requirement. Then you should question it, no matter how smart that person is. Requirements from smart people are the most dangerous, because people are less likely to question them. Always do so, even if the requirement came from me. Then make the requirements less dumb. 2. Delete any part or process you can. You may have to add them back later. In fact, if you do not end up adding back at least 10% of them, then you didn’t delete enough. 3. Simplify & optimize. This should come after step two. A common mistake is to simplify and optimize a part or a process that should not exist. 4. Accelerate cycle time. Every process can be speeded up. But only do this after you have followed the first three steps. In the Tesla factory, I mistakenly spent a lot of time accelerating processes that I later realized should have been deleted. 5. Automate. That comes last. The big mistake in Nevada and at Fremont was that I began by trying to automate every step. We should have waited until all the requirements had been questioned, parts and processes deleted, and the bugs were shaken out.” . . . Scott Morton (Scott Morton) Founder & CEO of Revel (Revel.io) "Oh man, I have so many stories. But actually, there’s a good one here. I think what Elon’s really good at is asking engineers to go further than they otherwise would have. One of the most interesting examples was the first orbital flight of Starship. We had this maneuver to separate the booster from the ship. We called it the “twig snap.” It essentially looked like a twig snapping in space, and it was a very inefficient way to do it. For the next flight, he was like, “We’re going to do hot staging,” which is where you literally start the Starship engines while it’s still connected to the booster and just blast off. Coming out of that, we all thought, “Okay, cool. We’re going to do the same exact conceptual operations for the next flight. Of course. We’re just going to go nail it this time, right?” And he was like, “No, we’re going to do hot staging on the next flight.” I was actually sitting outside. I wasn’t in the Elon meeting, but I was outside. I saw everyone walk out, and they were all just like, “Oh my God. How are we going to do this?” That week, screenshots started getting shot around. I’m sure everyone was thinking, “Oh, this is going to be really difficult.” But then, throughout the course of the week, some really awesome ideas started coming up. It started to look more and more feasible. Then it became, “How would you manufacture this? How would this all go together?” They ended up inventing, just out of nowhere, a new stage that would sit between the booster and the ship called the hot stage. It would take the blast, and then it would get ejected on reentry for the booster. It worked first shot. That’s insane. I just remember the vibes at SpaceX were like, “Oh my… how in the hell are we going to go do this?” But I think the big lesson there, and something I’ve pulled forward to Revel, is that when engineers come to you and say, “Hey, we just can’t get this to work. This is not possible,” you push them and say, “Well, why don’t you spend two more days thinking about it? Let’s see what comes up. And if nothing, we’ll think about it then.” Engineers really underestimate their ability to creatively problem-solve and come up with new ideas they otherwise never would have thought of when they’re presenting what they think is possible in the moment. I’ll say, “Okay.” They’ll say, “This just isn’t working. We don’t think this is a path.” And I’ll say, “Okay, let’s spend one more day thinking about it.” Oftentimes, there’ll be some breakthrough that no one saw coming. I don’t know how someone hasn’t made a movie about this. There are just so many stories. I mean, early Starship, back in the Hopper days, it was like…"

Molly O’Shea

90,303 views • 6 months ago

#SEONGHWA talking about watching his favorite musical, Les Misérables., for the first time in a theater in London! ⭐️: Anyway, as for what I did today, I’m talking in circles (not answering). Today… so yesterday after dinner I saw they were performing a musical. I’ve seen a lot of small‑theater musicals but I’ve never seen a really big musical live, like in person. So… and they happened to be performing my favorite! What could it be~? Oh, someone got it right. It's Les Misérables. When did it come out? I was in wlementary school? Wait, when did Les Misérables come out in Korea? When it first released I went to see it with my mom, just the two of us. (After researching it) Here it says it came out in 2012. Then how old was I? Was I in middle school? Yes, right. I went to see it with my mom, the two of us, and it was so fun. I think it was the first musical film I properly watched in a theater. Before that I watched Mamma Mia on DVD when I was in Australia, but I couldn’t understand it then so I didn’t know what was fun about it. Les Mis was the first musical film I properly saw in a theater. I loved it so much that I went to see it three or four more times. And then yesterday, when I came out after eating, I saw this huge billboard for it. So, since I’m the type who acts fast once I decide, I said “I’m going to watch it today,” and went with my manager. There were real session musicians there, like down below. I was shocked by that. From above, like slightly, youu could see the conductor. I didn’t know that, I thought they played MR... So I was like, “this is awesome.” I went and bought merch too. But I didn’t know which seats were good, so I just chose the seat in the back of the first floor. But because there’s a second floor, my view was blocked, my view of the stage looked like this (obstructed from the bottom and above), so I watched slouching on my chair like this. Now I know, the front row of the second floor is the best. Or the very front of the first floor so you can see the actors’ expressions well. But movies are better from the back so (I though was the same for musicals). Anyway. Yes, I think it was a “restricted view” seat... it was probably cheaper. Anyway, the show was 2 hours 50 minutes and since I know the movie so well I understood everything even without subtitles. It was so fun. I knew most of the songs too. It was my first time seeing a musical in such a big venue so it was really great. The actors too were amazing. There were about 40? And the set, there were at least 10 different ones. I don’t know how it works, because it’s was not people moving/changing sets. They just slid in and out and the stage transitions were so smooth. Who’s my favorite character? Oh, that's a hard question? First, I like Marius. Ah, actualyy, when I was younger I liked Cosette and Marius. But now I feel drawn to Éponine. Because she loves so... unconditionally. After watching it today, Éponine loves Marius but even while she’s in a one‑sided love, she tells him where the girl he loves lives and helps him escape. That's so sad. Fantine was really pitiful too. Kind of... unfairly treated? My favorite song is One Day More, of course. And today, there were songs that felt different listening now that I’m older. I don't know the titles so I’ll have to look them up. The lingering feeling was strong, it felt similar to when I first watched it. And after that act (One Day More), the audience clapped and cheered so loudly. You know, I thought musicals were supposed to be quiet? But everyone was cheering so loudly, so I clapped and shouted too. And right after it ended the lights suddenly turned on and I was like, "is it over?" but it was the intermission. There were Act 1 and Act 2. I was so confused, I really thought it was over. I asked myself, “Is this a half‑length movie?" I mean, "musical?” Everyone got up so naturally and I was just confused alone. Anyway, the orchestra was seriously so cool. I want to see it in Korea too.
11:54

#SEONGHWA talking about watching his favorite musical, Les Misérables., for the first time in a theater in London! ⭐️: Anyway, as for what I did today, I’m talking in circles (not answering). Today… so yesterday after dinner I saw they were performing a musical. I’ve seen a lot of small‑theater musicals but I’ve never seen a really big musical live, like in person. So… and they happened to be performing my favorite! What could it be~? Oh, someone got it right. It's Les Misérables. When did it come out? I was in wlementary school? Wait, when did Les Misérables come out in Korea? When it first released I went to see it with my mom, just the two of us. (After researching it) Here it says it came out in 2012. Then how old was I? Was I in middle school? Yes, right. I went to see it with my mom, the two of us, and it was so fun. I think it was the first musical film I properly watched in a theater. Before that I watched Mamma Mia on DVD when I was in Australia, but I couldn’t understand it then so I didn’t know what was fun about it. Les Mis was the first musical film I properly saw in a theater. I loved it so much that I went to see it three or four more times. And then yesterday, when I came out after eating, I saw this huge billboard for it. So, since I’m the type who acts fast once I decide, I said “I’m going to watch it today,” and went with my manager. There were real session musicians there, like down below. I was shocked by that. From above, like slightly, youu could see the conductor. I didn’t know that, I thought they played MR... So I was like, “this is awesome.” I went and bought merch too. But I didn’t know which seats were good, so I just chose the seat in the back of the first floor. But because there’s a second floor, my view was blocked, my view of the stage looked like this (obstructed from the bottom and above), so I watched slouching on my chair like this. Now I know, the front row of the second floor is the best. Or the very front of the first floor so you can see the actors’ expressions well. But movies are better from the back so (I though was the same for musicals). Anyway. Yes, I think it was a “restricted view” seat... it was probably cheaper. Anyway, the show was 2 hours 50 minutes and since I know the movie so well I understood everything even without subtitles. It was so fun. I knew most of the songs too. It was my first time seeing a musical in such a big venue so it was really great. The actors too were amazing. There were about 40? And the set, there were at least 10 different ones. I don’t know how it works, because it’s was not people moving/changing sets. They just slid in and out and the stage transitions were so smooth. Who’s my favorite character? Oh, that's a hard question? First, I like Marius. Ah, actualyy, when I was younger I liked Cosette and Marius. But now I feel drawn to Éponine. Because she loves so... unconditionally. After watching it today, Éponine loves Marius but even while she’s in a one‑sided love, she tells him where the girl he loves lives and helps him escape. That's so sad. Fantine was really pitiful too. Kind of... unfairly treated? My favorite song is One Day More, of course. And today, there were songs that felt different listening now that I’m older. I don't know the titles so I’ll have to look them up. The lingering feeling was strong, it felt similar to when I first watched it. And after that act (One Day More), the audience clapped and cheered so loudly. You know, I thought musicals were supposed to be quiet? But everyone was cheering so loudly, so I clapped and shouted too. And right after it ended the lights suddenly turned on and I was like, "is it over?" but it was the intermission. There were Act 1 and Act 2. I was so confused, I really thought it was over. I asked myself, “Is this a half‑length movie?" I mean, "musical?” Everyone got up so naturally and I was just confused alone. Anyway, the orchestra was seriously so cool. I want to see it in Korea too.

Everything Seonghwa

11,434 views • 2 months ago

In his continuing “Pool Monologues,” Trump hits a record ELEVEN AND A HALF MINUTES sitting with the NATO Secretary. I cannot emphasize enough… Try and read it. I dare you. 1/3 “The pool? Yes. It's in great shape. No. Ready? Thugs. They just told me a little while ago. Six have been arrested and like six or seven are under arrest. They have pictures and everything else. They went to the bottom and it's not a paint job. It's very expensive. It's not rubber but it's like rubber. And they went down with probably a box cutter or a very sharp razor of some kind of a knife. They cut and then they started ripping it up. You know why? Because there's sick people. And then the side of the pool, right at the water level, they took razors and they started cutting this very expensive stuff. It's incredible stuff. It's beautiful. And it's still beautiful. We have one area where they cut it. It's still holding. It's not leaking. But they hurt it so probably maybe after July 4th or maybe before. I don't know. Well, let a little water out because it's at the edge. They'll cut it. They'll replace it and it'll be as good as new. But these people should go to jail for a long time. You know, there's a statue that I saw when I had my first here that if you do anything to hurt statues or monuments, fountains in Washington, D.C. or federal fountain, it's actually federal all over the country. But you go to jail for 10 years and there's no shortcuts. In other words, it's not five years for good behavior. It's a very tough statue. And so tough that it really hasn't been used very much over the years. But I used it when they had a problem in Washington where they were trying to hurt the sickos, would try to hurt things, and I announced it. As soon as I announced it, read it, announced it. And I said, 10 years for anybody, everybody dropped what they had, including ropes. They had ropes. They were tying ropes around Thomas Jefferson's head, Andrew Jackson right up there, that a rope around his head on that incredible statue. I said, as soon as I invoked it, everybody left, that's still in play. They could go to jail for 10 years. They better be careful. They have a gash on that beautiful pool. It's a reflecting point. This is a very expensive material. Then on top of it, we did a much bigger job than we said we were going to do because we did all the outer areas. We did a beautiful job. It's like a piece of glass. And for some reason, this disturbed the radical left lunatics. You know, the guy that one of the guys, he's a member or a big pair to act blue. He's a big Hillary supporter. He's a big supporter of Sleepy Joe Biden. No, this is a very political thing. But as I understand it, six are under arrest. This was pure vandalism. It's an amazing thing that we did. Don't forget, it hasn't worked properly since it was built because it always leaked in 1922. So it was built in 1922. So that's 100 years more ago. It's never worked properly. I always said, had great potential. And I said in my first term, I'm going to do something. So Biden and Obama, between the two of them, spent over $100 million. It was a disaster. Obama, because of the environment, took the water from the Potomac, and it was horrible. It was bad. I don't want to have to tell you what happened, but it was really bad. You can read about it. Biden, he didn't have any idea what the hell they were doing because he didn't know what anything was happening. But they spent over $100 million. We spent 14 or 15 in a lot less than that because a lot of these people worked for the Parks Department anyway. So they're going to work. So I would say a lot less. And we put a great surface on it. This is a world-class surface. It looked beautiful. But they came in and they cut it. And then they grabbed it and they pulled it up. That's why it's all ripped. And who would even think of it? They're sick people. So I think they're in big trouble. But here's the bottom line.”
11:35

In his continuing “Pool Monologues,” Trump hits a record ELEVEN AND A HALF MINUTES sitting with the NATO Secretary. I cannot emphasize enough… Try and read it. I dare you. 1/3 “The pool? Yes. It's in great shape. No. Ready? Thugs. They just told me a little while ago. Six have been arrested and like six or seven are under arrest. They have pictures and everything else. They went to the bottom and it's not a paint job. It's very expensive. It's not rubber but it's like rubber. And they went down with probably a box cutter or a very sharp razor of some kind of a knife. They cut and then they started ripping it up. You know why? Because there's sick people. And then the side of the pool, right at the water level, they took razors and they started cutting this very expensive stuff. It's incredible stuff. It's beautiful. And it's still beautiful. We have one area where they cut it. It's still holding. It's not leaking. But they hurt it so probably maybe after July 4th or maybe before. I don't know. Well, let a little water out because it's at the edge. They'll cut it. They'll replace it and it'll be as good as new. But these people should go to jail for a long time. You know, there's a statue that I saw when I had my first here that if you do anything to hurt statues or monuments, fountains in Washington, D.C. or federal fountain, it's actually federal all over the country. But you go to jail for 10 years and there's no shortcuts. In other words, it's not five years for good behavior. It's a very tough statue. And so tough that it really hasn't been used very much over the years. But I used it when they had a problem in Washington where they were trying to hurt the sickos, would try to hurt things, and I announced it. As soon as I announced it, read it, announced it. And I said, 10 years for anybody, everybody dropped what they had, including ropes. They had ropes. They were tying ropes around Thomas Jefferson's head, Andrew Jackson right up there, that a rope around his head on that incredible statue. I said, as soon as I invoked it, everybody left, that's still in play. They could go to jail for 10 years. They better be careful. They have a gash on that beautiful pool. It's a reflecting point. This is a very expensive material. Then on top of it, we did a much bigger job than we said we were going to do because we did all the outer areas. We did a beautiful job. It's like a piece of glass. And for some reason, this disturbed the radical left lunatics. You know, the guy that one of the guys, he's a member or a big pair to act blue. He's a big Hillary supporter. He's a big supporter of Sleepy Joe Biden. No, this is a very political thing. But as I understand it, six are under arrest. This was pure vandalism. It's an amazing thing that we did. Don't forget, it hasn't worked properly since it was built because it always leaked in 1922. So it was built in 1922. So that's 100 years more ago. It's never worked properly. I always said, had great potential. And I said in my first term, I'm going to do something. So Biden and Obama, between the two of them, spent over $100 million. It was a disaster. Obama, because of the environment, took the water from the Potomac, and it was horrible. It was bad. I don't want to have to tell you what happened, but it was really bad. You can read about it. Biden, he didn't have any idea what the hell they were doing because he didn't know what anything was happening. But they spent over $100 million. We spent 14 or 15 in a lot less than that because a lot of these people worked for the Parks Department anyway. So they're going to work. So I would say a lot less. And we put a great surface on it. This is a world-class surface. It looked beautiful. But they came in and they cut it. And then they grabbed it and they pulled it up. That's why it's all ripped. And who would even think of it? They're sick people. So I think they're in big trouble. But here's the bottom line.”

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

212,919 views • 2 months ago

251207 Mingi, TOKTOQ pop live, p.2: 💬 Are you watching EXchange lately. 🐥 Yeah, I’m watching it. I’ve never watched EXchange before in my life. 🐥 Look I have double eyelids like this! 🐥 I don’t have any double eyelids at all. I’m just… neutral-eyes. I actually wanted to have eyes shaped kind of like inner double eyelids, but I wasn’t allowed to. …Did I say that too bluntly? 🐥 Ah, I caught a cold. A cold. 🐥 No, if you’re going to have monolids, they should be big monolids. Like this. About this much? What do you think? 💬 Mingi, don’t you all eat together after concerts? 🐥 We do, but only rarely… it’s tiring. Anyway, I need to wash now. Wash and sleep. Last night I washed up and lay down, and I just passed out. When I opened my eyes, I realized I slept with the lights on. 💬 So do you eat separately? 🐥 Sometimes we all eat together, sometimes separately. 🐥 Ah, I had milk tea today. 💬 Taiwanese gopchang? 🐥 I want gopchang… 💬 When are you coming back to Korea? 🐥 (teasing) When do you think? Tomorrow, tomorrow. I’m going back tomorrow. Yeah. 💬 Sorry for leaving early because I have work tomorrow. 🐥 What’s there to be sorry about? Sleep well. 🐥 The cheering today was so loud. It surprised me. 🐥 No, I was just walking by, and some guy looked at me and I was like “(bows) Hello” but then suddenly he went like “Ah-ah-ah Hoo-hoo-hoo (like barking) So I was like “(shy) oooh👍🏻” He was better than me (at barking?), honestly. I don’t know who it was, ofc. 💬 If you were to release another special track, who would it be with? 🐥 (with someone from) ATEEZ? Hmm… Right now I’m not sure, but I feel like I should at least do one song with Hongjoongie-hyung. But I honestly don’t know what genre we’d do. If we were going to do it, we should’ve done it earlier - At this point in time, if the two of us do something, we’d need to bring something really good. 💬 Rap ballad? 🐥 No, that won’t work/that’s not allowed. 🐥 Recommend artists to me. There are a lot of artists I don’t know, so I’ll look them up. 💬 Epik High. 🐥 Ah, Epik High sunbaenim - yeah, I want to work with them too. 💬 How’s Mingi’s eyesight? 🐥 After LASEK I’m like 1.2? 1.1? 💬 Cold. 🐥 Ah, Cold! Cold is great. I used to listen to Offonoff a lot - the whole Offonoff album is good. 💬 I’m into TOUCHED 🐥 TOUCHED is great. The song is really good - it has that charm that just hooks you right in. 🐥 Oh, Fall Out Boy is great. Linkin Park is amazing. The Rose - yeah, I like The Rose too. Sum41. 🐥 These days… Fujii Kaze? I listen to his songs a lot. 🐥 Oh, BadBuddy. 🐥 Oh, I should check out the artists you all mentioned. 💬 XDH 🐥 XDH? I’ll check out XDH too. Ah, Xdinary… I’ve seen Xdinary Heroes’ performance before - they’re really good. 🐥 Ah, Ha Yunsang-nim? I know him. Our old makeup artist-nuna is a huge fan, so I listened to his songs because of her. 🐥 Okay, I really need to wash now. I’ll wash and come back. Bye.
11:24

251207 Mingi, TOKTOQ pop live, p.2: 💬 Are you watching EXchange lately. 🐥 Yeah, I’m watching it. I’ve never watched EXchange before in my life. 🐥 Look I have double eyelids like this! 🐥 I don’t have any double eyelids at all. I’m just… neutral-eyes. I actually wanted to have eyes shaped kind of like inner double eyelids, but I wasn’t allowed to. …Did I say that too bluntly? 🐥 Ah, I caught a cold. A cold. 🐥 No, if you’re going to have monolids, they should be big monolids. Like this. About this much? What do you think? 💬 Mingi, don’t you all eat together after concerts? 🐥 We do, but only rarely… it’s tiring. Anyway, I need to wash now. Wash and sleep. Last night I washed up and lay down, and I just passed out. When I opened my eyes, I realized I slept with the lights on. 💬 So do you eat separately? 🐥 Sometimes we all eat together, sometimes separately. 🐥 Ah, I had milk tea today. 💬 Taiwanese gopchang? 🐥 I want gopchang… 💬 When are you coming back to Korea? 🐥 (teasing) When do you think? Tomorrow, tomorrow. I’m going back tomorrow. Yeah. 💬 Sorry for leaving early because I have work tomorrow. 🐥 What’s there to be sorry about? Sleep well. 🐥 The cheering today was so loud. It surprised me. 🐥 No, I was just walking by, and some guy looked at me and I was like “(bows) Hello” but then suddenly he went like “Ah-ah-ah Hoo-hoo-hoo (like barking) So I was like “(shy) oooh👍🏻” He was better than me (at barking?), honestly. I don’t know who it was, ofc. 💬 If you were to release another special track, who would it be with? 🐥 (with someone from) ATEEZ? Hmm… Right now I’m not sure, but I feel like I should at least do one song with Hongjoongie-hyung. But I honestly don’t know what genre we’d do. If we were going to do it, we should’ve done it earlier - At this point in time, if the two of us do something, we’d need to bring something really good. 💬 Rap ballad? 🐥 No, that won’t work/that’s not allowed. 🐥 Recommend artists to me. There are a lot of artists I don’t know, so I’ll look them up. 💬 Epik High. 🐥 Ah, Epik High sunbaenim - yeah, I want to work with them too. 💬 How’s Mingi’s eyesight? 🐥 After LASEK I’m like 1.2? 1.1? 💬 Cold. 🐥 Ah, Cold! Cold is great. I used to listen to Offonoff a lot - the whole Offonoff album is good. 💬 I’m into TOUCHED 🐥 TOUCHED is great. The song is really good - it has that charm that just hooks you right in. 🐥 Oh, Fall Out Boy is great. Linkin Park is amazing. The Rose - yeah, I like The Rose too. Sum41. 🐥 These days… Fujii Kaze? I listen to his songs a lot. 🐥 Oh, BadBuddy. 🐥 Oh, I should check out the artists you all mentioned. 💬 XDH 🐥 XDH? I’ll check out XDH too. Ah, Xdinary… I’ve seen Xdinary Heroes’ performance before - they’re really good. 🐥 Ah, Ha Yunsang-nim? I know him. Our old makeup artist-nuna is a huge fan, so I listened to his songs because of her. 🐥 Okay, I really need to wash now. I’ll wash and come back. Bye.

Irene | AhgaTiny

14,459 views • 8 months ago

WOAH 🚨 Pay attention to this American pharmacist exposing that some cheap, very effective drugs, HAVE BEEN BANNED form being prescribed because they’re too cheap So instead of the cheap option, drugs that cost $1,000+ are allowed for certain treatments (INSANE) “The most insane examples of why drugs cost so much is a drug called Brenzavvy. You almost certainly haven't heard of it, but you've probably heard of similar drugs like Jardiance or Farxiga. The reason you haven't heard of Brenzavvy, though, is because no insurance companies will cover it. Most doctors won't prescribe it, and most wholesalers won't even carry it. When I tell you why our entire healthcare industry is turning its back on this proven drug in one of the most critical classes in existence, you are going to be furious. They are shunning Brenzavvy because it's too cheap. I'm not being hyperbolic or sensational. I mean it literally. At my pharmacy, Brenzavvy costs $60 bucks. When they took that price to the pharmacy benefits managers, or PBMs, that's the people in charge of deciding what's covered on your insurance, they all said no, because Brenzavvy can't do a rebate at a price that low. Farxiga and Jardiance, the other Drugs in the SLGT 2 class with Brenzavvy, cost insurance payers $1000 bucks each prescription up front. Then they get a big, probably like 40% rebate later. So that's a $400 rebate, and that is a huge selling point for the PBMs to prove how important they are. The PBMs get a piece of that rebate, and they get a percentage of the final price. An HHS report from last year said that the PBMs get 23% on average for for brand meds. After the rebate, Farxiga and Jardiance still cost $600. 23% of that is $138 for the middleman. Those drugs get dispensed 8 million times a year, which means the total they make in a year off of those two drugs is $1.1 billion. They don't make the drug, they don't prescribe it, they don't dispense it, they don't sell it. They only have to do one thing to make that money. Keep Brenzavvy off their list. If they let in a drug that costs 1/10 of the price and doesn't pay rebate, they literally lose a billion dollars a year. To me, that's the clearest example of why we will never get affordable health care in America. As long as we have PBMs involved, they can't afford to save you money.“ So while this might not be an outright ban, meaning illegal to create, for all purposes it is a ban. Because if the insurance companies won’t cover it, their doctors won’t prescribe it and nearly all wholesalers won’t carry it, that means the insurances companies and PBMs are effectively banning medication in America so they can make maximum profits. Billions a year on a single Medicine, when there are much cheaper options available for the customer This is organized crime. This is racketeering
2:27

WOAH 🚨 Pay attention to this American pharmacist exposing that some cheap, very effective drugs, HAVE BEEN BANNED form being prescribed because they’re too cheap So instead of the cheap option, drugs that cost $1,000+ are allowed for certain treatments (INSANE) “The most insane examples of why drugs cost so much is a drug called Brenzavvy. You almost certainly haven't heard of it, but you've probably heard of similar drugs like Jardiance or Farxiga. The reason you haven't heard of Brenzavvy, though, is because no insurance companies will cover it. Most doctors won't prescribe it, and most wholesalers won't even carry it. When I tell you why our entire healthcare industry is turning its back on this proven drug in one of the most critical classes in existence, you are going to be furious. They are shunning Brenzavvy because it's too cheap. I'm not being hyperbolic or sensational. I mean it literally. At my pharmacy, Brenzavvy costs $60 bucks. When they took that price to the pharmacy benefits managers, or PBMs, that's the people in charge of deciding what's covered on your insurance, they all said no, because Brenzavvy can't do a rebate at a price that low. Farxiga and Jardiance, the other Drugs in the SLGT 2 class with Brenzavvy, cost insurance payers $1000 bucks each prescription up front. Then they get a big, probably like 40% rebate later. So that's a $400 rebate, and that is a huge selling point for the PBMs to prove how important they are. The PBMs get a piece of that rebate, and they get a percentage of the final price. An HHS report from last year said that the PBMs get 23% on average for for brand meds. After the rebate, Farxiga and Jardiance still cost $600. 23% of that is $138 for the middleman. Those drugs get dispensed 8 million times a year, which means the total they make in a year off of those two drugs is $1.1 billion. They don't make the drug, they don't prescribe it, they don't dispense it, they don't sell it. They only have to do one thing to make that money. Keep Brenzavvy off their list. If they let in a drug that costs 1/10 of the price and doesn't pay rebate, they literally lose a billion dollars a year. To me, that's the clearest example of why we will never get affordable health care in America. As long as we have PBMs involved, they can't afford to save you money.“ So while this might not be an outright ban, meaning illegal to create, for all purposes it is a ban. Because if the insurance companies won’t cover it, their doctors won’t prescribe it and nearly all wholesalers won’t carry it, that means the insurances companies and PBMs are effectively banning medication in America so they can make maximum profits. Billions a year on a single Medicine, when there are much cheaper options available for the customer This is organized crime. This is racketeering

Wall Street Apes

107,917 views • 1 year ago

The 15 rules of Filmmaking for comedy movies by Zucker, Abrahams and Zucker (ZAZ): "1. JOKE ON A JOKE: Two jokes at the same time cancel each other out. If the joke is in the background, the foreground action should be serious, and vice versa. Focus on one joke at a time. 2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Sometimes referred to as “winking.” Don’t acknowledge the joke, or that you made a joke. Actors in the foreground must ignore jokes happening behind them. 3. MERELY CLEVER: A “clever” joke isn’t good enough. It has to get a laugh. 4. BREAKING THE FRAME: Don’t remind the audience they’re watching a movie. Jokes about the movie itself, the movie business, or comedy itself are a strict no-no, although it’s possible to sneak one in if you don’t dwell on it. See Rule #11: That didn’t happen. 5. TRIVIA: A joke using references so arcane that few people will ever get it. 6. JERRY LEWIS: A comedian who is doing every possible crazy thing he can to get a laugh. As a result, when something was over the top, we would just say, “Jerry Lewis.” 7. AXE GRINDING: When the joke is overshadowed by some message, it gets unfunny fast. 8. KNOCKING DOWN THE POSTS: Conceptual jokes are fine, but people don’t laugh at concepts; they laugh at verbal or visual punch lines. In 'Airplane!' (1980) the gag of the soldier leaning out the door as his girlfriend runs alongside is merely referencing the same scene we’ve seen in hundreds of films where it makes sense—or a train. Fortunately, we decided to put old-style railroad posts on the runway and have the girl knock them over. People clearly get the concept of the scene, but they don’t laugh until she knocks down the posts. 9. STRAW DUMMY: A hollow setup for a joke where the target has been invented by the writer. You can’t satirize something that doesn’t exist. Like a block-long, nuclear-powered bus. 10. CAN YOU LIVE WITH IT?: Once a joke is made, it can’t be allowed to hang around (Rule #14). Like a personalized license plate, how long can “LV2FART” be funny? 11. THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN: Something that totally defies all logic but is on and off the screen so fast that we get away with it. Robert Stack in 'Airplane!' yells, “They’re on instruments!” Cut to the cockpit—the actors are playing musical instruments. Seconds later, the saxophone and clarinets have disappeared. If it’s done right, no one in the audience will ask where the instruments went. 12. UNRELATED BACKGROUND: A joke happening in the background, though unacknowledged, still needs to be related in some way to the action in the foreground. This rule was put into effect after the release of Airplane!, when we desperately trying to figure out why no one laughed at the spear striking the wall behind Robert Stack and a watermelon crashing on the table behind Lloyd Bridges. It made us laugh so hard when we wrote it, filmed it, saw it in dailies, as well as the finished film. Unfortunately we were the only ones. It was craziness without an actual joke. We left it in, and probably in some way it adds to the irreverent tone of the film, but it never gets a laugh. 13. TECHNICAL PIZZAZZ: Special effects and big action don’t necessarily mean funny. 14. HANGING ON: Don’t play a joke too long. When it reaches its peak, get out. The film should move off a joke before the audience does. 15. THERE ARE NO RULES: We try to follow these rules as closely as possible, realizing that perhaps what is most important is knowing when to ignore them." ("Surely You Can't be Serious - The True Story of Airplane!", ZAZ interviewed by Will Harris, 2023) P.S: On this day, 46 years ago, "Airplane!" (1980) was released in the USA.
1:19

The 15 rules of Filmmaking for comedy movies by Zucker, Abrahams and Zucker (ZAZ): "1. JOKE ON A JOKE: Two jokes at the same time cancel each other out. If the joke is in the background, the foreground action should be serious, and vice versa. Focus on one joke at a time. 2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Sometimes referred to as “winking.” Don’t acknowledge the joke, or that you made a joke. Actors in the foreground must ignore jokes happening behind them. 3. MERELY CLEVER: A “clever” joke isn’t good enough. It has to get a laugh. 4. BREAKING THE FRAME: Don’t remind the audience they’re watching a movie. Jokes about the movie itself, the movie business, or comedy itself are a strict no-no, although it’s possible to sneak one in if you don’t dwell on it. See Rule #11: That didn’t happen. 5. TRIVIA: A joke using references so arcane that few people will ever get it. 6. JERRY LEWIS: A comedian who is doing every possible crazy thing he can to get a laugh. As a result, when something was over the top, we would just say, “Jerry Lewis.” 7. AXE GRINDING: When the joke is overshadowed by some message, it gets unfunny fast. 8. KNOCKING DOWN THE POSTS: Conceptual jokes are fine, but people don’t laugh at concepts; they laugh at verbal or visual punch lines. In 'Airplane!' (1980) the gag of the soldier leaning out the door as his girlfriend runs alongside is merely referencing the same scene we’ve seen in hundreds of films where it makes sense—or a train. Fortunately, we decided to put old-style railroad posts on the runway and have the girl knock them over. People clearly get the concept of the scene, but they don’t laugh until she knocks down the posts. 9. STRAW DUMMY: A hollow setup for a joke where the target has been invented by the writer. You can’t satirize something that doesn’t exist. Like a block-long, nuclear-powered bus. 10. CAN YOU LIVE WITH IT?: Once a joke is made, it can’t be allowed to hang around (Rule #14). Like a personalized license plate, how long can “LV2FART” be funny? 11. THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN: Something that totally defies all logic but is on and off the screen so fast that we get away with it. Robert Stack in 'Airplane!' yells, “They’re on instruments!” Cut to the cockpit—the actors are playing musical instruments. Seconds later, the saxophone and clarinets have disappeared. If it’s done right, no one in the audience will ask where the instruments went. 12. UNRELATED BACKGROUND: A joke happening in the background, though unacknowledged, still needs to be related in some way to the action in the foreground. This rule was put into effect after the release of Airplane!, when we desperately trying to figure out why no one laughed at the spear striking the wall behind Robert Stack and a watermelon crashing on the table behind Lloyd Bridges. It made us laugh so hard when we wrote it, filmed it, saw it in dailies, as well as the finished film. Unfortunately we were the only ones. It was craziness without an actual joke. We left it in, and probably in some way it adds to the irreverent tone of the film, but it never gets a laugh. 13. TECHNICAL PIZZAZZ: Special effects and big action don’t necessarily mean funny. 14. HANGING ON: Don’t play a joke too long. When it reaches its peak, get out. The film should move off a joke before the audience does. 15. THERE ARE NO RULES: We try to follow these rules as closely as possible, realizing that perhaps what is most important is knowing when to ignore them." ("Surely You Can't be Serious - The True Story of Airplane!", ZAZ interviewed by Will Harris, 2023) P.S: On this day, 46 years ago, "Airplane!" (1980) was released in the USA.

DepressedBergman

88,650 views • 1 month ago

🧵 As a penny-stock swing trader, obsessed with data. I spent months building something most retail never bothers with - an 816-event reverse-split dataset, hand-labelled for a statistical deep dive to find the edge here Thesis - you can go long after the reverse split to harvest the mega pumps (>1,000%) like we saw in $TNON, $AREB, $SMX and $AKAN lately. 📁 My key intellectual asset is the .xls dataset 816 US R/S events, Sept 2024 → May 2026. Manually curated from TradingView , SEC filings, dilution trackers. The brutal part wasn't the dates - it was nailing the exact shares outstanding immediately after each split back in the day - took months, but I made it. Companies not always broadcast that number in their pre-split PR(especialy if ADS are involved). You back it out from the next 10-Q, an 8-K Item 3.02, or float-compression math inside a 424B. Sometimes three filings to confirm one row. What do I concider as a Pump⛽️ = any 1-day intraday ≥50% move within D+1–D+10 of effective date (incl. pre/post-market which is the most common). 🚨FIRST FINDINGS: post R/S pump rate - 30.3%. Sub-1.4M S/O cohort it is even bigger - 38.2%. Now I need to find additional predictors and develop a backtested trading strategy!🚨 🧪 Methodology 15 pre-registered hypotheses across float, split ratio, geography, toxic underwriters, structured-finance funds, cash runway, prior R/S, sector, VIX, entry-day etc.. Two layers: P(pump), and P(extreme | pump) - the 300%+ TNON/SMX archetype. 🔬 The pipeline Contingency tables + χ²/Mann-Whitney univariate, ORs with 95% Wald CIs, Benjamini-Hochberg FDR at q=0.10 across the family. Phase 4 (out of 10) will cover logistic regression with stability selection (500 bootstrap resamples, retention ≥60%), XGBoost under nested time-based 5-fold CV - outer loop for performance, inner Optuna for hyperparams (no tune-on-test leakage), SHAP for direction, RuleFit for lift-≥2 / support-≥30 rules, decision-curve analysis for net trader gain, reliability + Brier on a time-held-out test set. 📊 So far I'm at Phase 2a and preliminaty result are really encouraging. 🚀 What's next? Hypothesis 1 held! Already enriching - toxic-fund 13Gs, last-424B underwriter ID, going-concern flags, warrant overhangs (edgar data collection). If the multivariate gate (PR-AUC ≥0.30, top-decile precision ≥30%, out-of-sample) holds, Claude builds a Claude Skill and a Dashboard so I can automate the future research: ticker + R/S date (usually given in advance) → instant pump probability with SHAP reasoning 🔒 Disclosure: I made sure, the research is not replicable from this post as the signal lives in the locked .XLS dataset (only dataclearance took me one week🤓) and you can see the stevendu acknpwledgment of the key constrain for such project. If Phase 4 fails the gate, I close with a null-result write-up. That's still on the table. Let me know below if you are big on coding / statistics / have tons of Claude tokens😄 to participate in this research and as a result get access to the destilled trading strategy and finally find your statistically-proven edge, gave up gambling 🫂
1:12

🧵 As a penny-stock swing trader, obsessed with data. I spent months building something most retail never bothers with - an 816-event reverse-split dataset, hand-labelled for a statistical deep dive to find the edge here Thesis - you can go long after the reverse split to harvest the mega pumps (>1,000%) like we saw in $TNON, $AREB, $SMX and $AKAN lately. 📁 My key intellectual asset is the .xls dataset 816 US R/S events, Sept 2024 → May 2026. Manually curated from TradingView , SEC filings, dilution trackers. The brutal part wasn't the dates - it was nailing the exact shares outstanding immediately after each split back in the day - took months, but I made it. Companies not always broadcast that number in their pre-split PR(especialy if ADS are involved). You back it out from the next 10-Q, an 8-K Item 3.02, or float-compression math inside a 424B. Sometimes three filings to confirm one row. What do I concider as a Pump⛽️ = any 1-day intraday ≥50% move within D+1–D+10 of effective date (incl. pre/post-market which is the most common). 🚨FIRST FINDINGS: post R/S pump rate - 30.3%. Sub-1.4M S/O cohort it is even bigger - 38.2%. Now I need to find additional predictors and develop a backtested trading strategy!🚨 🧪 Methodology 15 pre-registered hypotheses across float, split ratio, geography, toxic underwriters, structured-finance funds, cash runway, prior R/S, sector, VIX, entry-day etc.. Two layers: P(pump), and P(extreme | pump) - the 300%+ TNON/SMX archetype. 🔬 The pipeline Contingency tables + χ²/Mann-Whitney univariate, ORs with 95% Wald CIs, Benjamini-Hochberg FDR at q=0.10 across the family. Phase 4 (out of 10) will cover logistic regression with stability selection (500 bootstrap resamples, retention ≥60%), XGBoost under nested time-based 5-fold CV - outer loop for performance, inner Optuna for hyperparams (no tune-on-test leakage), SHAP for direction, RuleFit for lift-≥2 / support-≥30 rules, decision-curve analysis for net trader gain, reliability + Brier on a time-held-out test set. 📊 So far I'm at Phase 2a and preliminaty result are really encouraging. 🚀 What's next? Hypothesis 1 held! Already enriching - toxic-fund 13Gs, last-424B underwriter ID, going-concern flags, warrant overhangs (edgar data collection). If the multivariate gate (PR-AUC ≥0.30, top-decile precision ≥30%, out-of-sample) holds, Claude builds a Claude Skill and a Dashboard so I can automate the future research: ticker + R/S date (usually given in advance) → instant pump probability with SHAP reasoning 🔒 Disclosure: I made sure, the research is not replicable from this post as the signal lives in the locked .XLS dataset (only dataclearance took me one week🤓) and you can see the stevendu acknpwledgment of the key constrain for such project. If Phase 4 fails the gate, I close with a null-result write-up. That's still on the table. Let me know below if you are big on coding / statistics / have tons of Claude tokens😄 to participate in this research and as a result get access to the destilled trading strategy and finally find your statistically-proven edge, gave up gambling 🫂

Dogtor🎰📈

13,902 views • 3 months ago

Bill Ackman literally gave a 44-minute masterclass that explains money better than any business school. 1. Starting early is the single biggest advantage you have. If you save $10,000 at age 22, never add another penny, and earn 10% a year, you have $600,000 by retirement. wait until 32 to start, and the same money only grows to $232,000. The decade you lose at the beginning costs you more than any decade later because compounding does its heaviest lifting at the end. 2. The return rate matters even more than most people grasp. That same $10,000 at 22 earning 10% becomes $600,000. At 15% it becomes over 4 million. At 20%, the rate Warren Buffett has achieved, it becomes 25 million. Einstein called compound interest the most powerful force in the universe. Ackman's lecture is essentially a demonstration of why. 3. Avoiding losses matters as much as chasing returns. if you reach for a 20% return but lose half your money every 12 years from bad decisions or a rough patch, your 25 million collapses to 1.8 million. Buffett's rule one is never lose money. Rule two is never forget rule one. the math of recovery is brutal, so protecting the downside is not caution, it is strategy. 4. Debt is safer, but the upside is capped. Equity is riskier, but the upside is unlimited. In the lemonade stand example, the lender who put up $250 earns a steady 10% and gets paid back first if the business fails. the equity investor who put up $500 earns over 100% if it succeeds but gets wiped out if it fails. The equity holder earns more precisely because they took the risk the lender refused. 5. The risk that matters is permanent loss, not price movement. most people think risk is the stock price bouncing up and down every day. Ackman says ignore that. the real risk is whether you will permanently lose your money. Short-term volatility is noise. the question that matters is whether you get your capital back with a return over the long run. 6. Avoid startups and complicated businesses. You do not need 100% a year to build a fortune. you need 10 to 15% over a long period. so skip the lemonade stands and unknown ventures. Invest in public companies that are established, liquid, and have to clear real hurdles before going public. If you cannot understand how a business makes money, avoid it no matter how good its track record. Ackman cites Enron, a business almost nobody actually understood. 7. Invest in a business you could own forever. if the stock market closed for 10 years, you should not be unhappy holding it. Coca-Cola is his example. easy to understand, sells a syrup and earns a profit on every drink, the population keeps growing, and it is nearly impossible to disrupt with new technology. McDonald's is another. People have to eat, the food is cheap, and they keep growing. find a business you would be comfortable holding through anything. 8. You want products people are loyal to and will pay a premium for. People buy generic flour and sugar without caring about the brand. but they want the Hershey bar, the Cadbury bar, the see's candy specifically. you do not want to sell a commodity that anyone can sell cheaper. You want something unique that customers refuse to substitute even at a 20% discount. 9. Low debt is a safety feature. In the lemonade stand example, $250 of debt was manageable. But if it had been $1,000 and the business hit a rough patch, it could have gone under and wiped out the shareholders. Find companies with little debt or so much profit relative to their interest payments that a bad year cannot sink them. 10. Barriers to entry protect your returns. You want a business that is hard for someone to compete with tomorrow. Coca-Cola's market presence is so strong that you expect to get a Coke at any restaurant. Pepsi has coexisted with it for decades, but neither can put the other out of business. If a competitor can show up next year with a better version and steal the customers, the business is not worth owning long term. 11. The best businesses are immune to outside factors you cannot control. Coca-Cola has survived 120 years through world wars, nuclear weapons, and every kind of crisis, and each year it makes slightly more money. You want companies that do not depend on commodity prices, interest rates, or currency moves. A business that keeps earning regardless of what is happening in the world is the kind you hold forever. 12. Low capital intensity is one of the most underrated qualities. The worst businesses require massive reinvestment to grow. The auto industry has to build enormous factories and buy machine tools before selling a single car, and those tools wear out. GM's stock barely moved over 40 to 50 years for exactly this reason. Coca-Cola, by contrast, sells a formula and collects a royalty. American Express takes a few percent of every dollar spent on its card. a business that earns a royalty on other people's capital is one of the best things you can own. 13. Pay down debt and build a cushion before you invest. If you have high-interest credit card debt, paying it off is a guaranteed return equal to the interest rate. same logic, to a lesser degree, with student loans at 6 or 7%. and you want 6 to 12 months of expenses in the bank so that losing your job tomorrow does not force you to sell. You can only handle market volatility if you do not need the money. 14. Be a buyer when everyone is selling and a seller when everyone is buying. The natural human tendency is the opposite, a lemming-like instinct to sell in a crash and buy in a bubble. people sold into the 1987 crash when they should have been buying. The only way to resist this is to be financially secure enough that the money at risk does not affect your life, so you can withstand the swings without panicking. 15. The stock market is a voting machine in the short term and a weighing machine in the long term. Ben Graham's idea, which Ackman repeats. short-term prices reflect the whims and emotions of investors. long term, prices reflect the actual value of the underlying businesses. If you buy good businesses at reasonable prices and hold them while they grow, you make money over time as long as you are never forced to sell at the wrong moment. 16. A stock is just a bond where you do not know the coupon. Flip a price-to-earnings ratio over, and you get an earnings yield. A stock at 10 times earnings is a 10% earnings yield, which you can compare directly to a 3% treasury. the difference is the bond's coupon is fixed and the stock's coupon, its earnings, moves up and down. Ackman wants an earnings yield higher than a treasury that will also grow over time, so he does not need to be right about explosive growth to earn a good return.
43:36

Bill Ackman literally gave a 44-minute masterclass that explains money better than any business school. 1. Starting early is the single biggest advantage you have. If you save $10,000 at age 22, never add another penny, and earn 10% a year, you have $600,000 by retirement. wait until 32 to start, and the same money only grows to $232,000. The decade you lose at the beginning costs you more than any decade later because compounding does its heaviest lifting at the end. 2. The return rate matters even more than most people grasp. That same $10,000 at 22 earning 10% becomes $600,000. At 15% it becomes over 4 million. At 20%, the rate Warren Buffett has achieved, it becomes 25 million. Einstein called compound interest the most powerful force in the universe. Ackman's lecture is essentially a demonstration of why. 3. Avoiding losses matters as much as chasing returns. if you reach for a 20% return but lose half your money every 12 years from bad decisions or a rough patch, your 25 million collapses to 1.8 million. Buffett's rule one is never lose money. Rule two is never forget rule one. the math of recovery is brutal, so protecting the downside is not caution, it is strategy. 4. Debt is safer, but the upside is capped. Equity is riskier, but the upside is unlimited. In the lemonade stand example, the lender who put up $250 earns a steady 10% and gets paid back first if the business fails. the equity investor who put up $500 earns over 100% if it succeeds but gets wiped out if it fails. The equity holder earns more precisely because they took the risk the lender refused. 5. The risk that matters is permanent loss, not price movement. most people think risk is the stock price bouncing up and down every day. Ackman says ignore that. the real risk is whether you will permanently lose your money. Short-term volatility is noise. the question that matters is whether you get your capital back with a return over the long run. 6. Avoid startups and complicated businesses. You do not need 100% a year to build a fortune. you need 10 to 15% over a long period. so skip the lemonade stands and unknown ventures. Invest in public companies that are established, liquid, and have to clear real hurdles before going public. If you cannot understand how a business makes money, avoid it no matter how good its track record. Ackman cites Enron, a business almost nobody actually understood. 7. Invest in a business you could own forever. if the stock market closed for 10 years, you should not be unhappy holding it. Coca-Cola is his example. easy to understand, sells a syrup and earns a profit on every drink, the population keeps growing, and it is nearly impossible to disrupt with new technology. McDonald's is another. People have to eat, the food is cheap, and they keep growing. find a business you would be comfortable holding through anything. 8. You want products people are loyal to and will pay a premium for. People buy generic flour and sugar without caring about the brand. but they want the Hershey bar, the Cadbury bar, the see's candy specifically. you do not want to sell a commodity that anyone can sell cheaper. You want something unique that customers refuse to substitute even at a 20% discount. 9. Low debt is a safety feature. In the lemonade stand example, $250 of debt was manageable. But if it had been $1,000 and the business hit a rough patch, it could have gone under and wiped out the shareholders. Find companies with little debt or so much profit relative to their interest payments that a bad year cannot sink them. 10. Barriers to entry protect your returns. You want a business that is hard for someone to compete with tomorrow. Coca-Cola's market presence is so strong that you expect to get a Coke at any restaurant. Pepsi has coexisted with it for decades, but neither can put the other out of business. If a competitor can show up next year with a better version and steal the customers, the business is not worth owning long term. 11. The best businesses are immune to outside factors you cannot control. Coca-Cola has survived 120 years through world wars, nuclear weapons, and every kind of crisis, and each year it makes slightly more money. You want companies that do not depend on commodity prices, interest rates, or currency moves. A business that keeps earning regardless of what is happening in the world is the kind you hold forever. 12. Low capital intensity is one of the most underrated qualities. The worst businesses require massive reinvestment to grow. The auto industry has to build enormous factories and buy machine tools before selling a single car, and those tools wear out. GM's stock barely moved over 40 to 50 years for exactly this reason. Coca-Cola, by contrast, sells a formula and collects a royalty. American Express takes a few percent of every dollar spent on its card. a business that earns a royalty on other people's capital is one of the best things you can own. 13. Pay down debt and build a cushion before you invest. If you have high-interest credit card debt, paying it off is a guaranteed return equal to the interest rate. same logic, to a lesser degree, with student loans at 6 or 7%. and you want 6 to 12 months of expenses in the bank so that losing your job tomorrow does not force you to sell. You can only handle market volatility if you do not need the money. 14. Be a buyer when everyone is selling and a seller when everyone is buying. The natural human tendency is the opposite, a lemming-like instinct to sell in a crash and buy in a bubble. people sold into the 1987 crash when they should have been buying. The only way to resist this is to be financially secure enough that the money at risk does not affect your life, so you can withstand the swings without panicking. 15. The stock market is a voting machine in the short term and a weighing machine in the long term. Ben Graham's idea, which Ackman repeats. short-term prices reflect the whims and emotions of investors. long term, prices reflect the actual value of the underlying businesses. If you buy good businesses at reasonable prices and hold them while they grow, you make money over time as long as you are never forced to sell at the wrong moment. 16. A stock is just a bond where you do not know the coupon. Flip a price-to-earnings ratio over, and you get an earnings yield. A stock at 10 times earnings is a 10% earnings yield, which you can compare directly to a 3% treasury. the difference is the bond's coupon is fixed and the stock's coupon, its earnings, moves up and down. Ackman wants an earnings yield higher than a treasury that will also grow over time, so he does not need to be right about explosive growth to earn a good return.

Jaynit

54,022 views • 1 day ago

I revived my 14-year-old dog with peptides. 6 months ago, he was slowing down fast. He was limping, achy, getting up slowly, and couldn't jump on the couch. We honestly didn't know if we had 6 months left with him. Today, our boy is running, jumping on the patio, going on long walks again, and even his hearing is back. I approached his protocol the same way I'd approach mine. - We started with BPC-157 and TB-500. 1-2 mg a day, 5 days on, 2 days off, injected basically the same way you'd inject a human. Within a couple of weeks, we saw less limping, less stiffness, he was moving better, etc. - Then we ran his labs the same way I run mine. Everything looked good except some minor kidney markets, and at his age kidney issues can spiral into problems dogs don't come back from. We addressed this with a bioregulator stack, again the same ones I use. - Then we put him on TRT. We're all aware of what happens to men when testosterone tanks with age. Now consider that we neuter our dogs, cut off their testosterone production entirely, and never think about it again. We put our boy on testosterone and the change was immediate. Within days of the first shot he became a different dog. We started with one shot a week, but just like in humans, by day 5 or 6 the levels drop and you get peaks and troughs. So we split it into two shots a week: Tuesday and Friday. We started conservatively, around 20mg per shot, and titrated up from there based on how he responded and how his labs looked. We landed at about 60mg total per week for a 70 pound dog, keeping a close eye on labs the whole way. That made a huge difference. Shot day is like a revival for him. ... And it's not just us, in fact other families are running the same protocol and seeing similar results. 6 months ago we were counting the time we had left with him. My kids were horrified by the thought that he would no longer be there as they grew up with him as their full-time guardian. Now I genuinely believe we have another 3 years. If you have a dog, understand that he's aging the same way you are. He needs help, but he can't do the research... you can! And after seeing what this protocol did for him, I knew other dog owners deserved access to it too, so check the tweet below.
0:32

I revived my 14-year-old dog with peptides. 6 months ago, he was slowing down fast. He was limping, achy, getting up slowly, and couldn't jump on the couch. We honestly didn't know if we had 6 months left with him. Today, our boy is running, jumping on the patio, going on long walks again, and even his hearing is back. I approached his protocol the same way I'd approach mine. - We started with BPC-157 and TB-500. 1-2 mg a day, 5 days on, 2 days off, injected basically the same way you'd inject a human. Within a couple of weeks, we saw less limping, less stiffness, he was moving better, etc. - Then we ran his labs the same way I run mine. Everything looked good except some minor kidney markets, and at his age kidney issues can spiral into problems dogs don't come back from. We addressed this with a bioregulator stack, again the same ones I use. - Then we put him on TRT. We're all aware of what happens to men when testosterone tanks with age. Now consider that we neuter our dogs, cut off their testosterone production entirely, and never think about it again. We put our boy on testosterone and the change was immediate. Within days of the first shot he became a different dog. We started with one shot a week, but just like in humans, by day 5 or 6 the levels drop and you get peaks and troughs. So we split it into two shots a week: Tuesday and Friday. We started conservatively, around 20mg per shot, and titrated up from there based on how he responded and how his labs looked. We landed at about 60mg total per week for a 70 pound dog, keeping a close eye on labs the whole way. That made a huge difference. Shot day is like a revival for him. ... And it's not just us, in fact other families are running the same protocol and seeing similar results. 6 months ago we were counting the time we had left with him. My kids were horrified by the thought that he would no longer be there as they grew up with him as their full-time guardian. Now I genuinely believe we have another 3 years. If you have a dog, understand that he's aging the same way you are. He needs help, but he can't do the research... you can! And after seeing what this protocol did for him, I knew other dog owners deserved access to it too, so check the tweet below.

Michael Morelli

822,304 views • 1 month ago