正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Hot take: Omarion Hampton should be a Round 2 draft pick. Negatives: -problem solving laterally -downgears laterally -"willing" pass pro vs good reps -adequate route running+hands -inconsistent power/leg churn -long speed - He's not Breece Hall, Jonathan Taylor, or Nick Chubb.

jmthrivept's profile picture

Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT

49,067 subscribers

437,382 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

体育新闻政治教育
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 条评论

Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT 的头像
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 年前

a lot of "how did he not score" or "how did he not get the first down" plays. And plays where Jonathan Taylor/Nick Chubb (I've seen the comps) would have scored on long runs instead of getting caught from behind.

Noah Basketball 的头像
Noah Basketball1 年前

🏀 "I think it's only going to make us a better shooting team, a better shooting program. I'm proud to be a Noah customer." – Coach Garrison Unlock the full potential of your team with Noah Backboard. From better shots to better results, there’s a reason coaches choose Noah.

Brett 的头像
Brett1 年前

Some of these listed weaknesses are things he actually excels at... Which begs the question... You good?

Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT 的头像
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 年前

Films not for everyone

JetPack Galileo 的头像
JetPack Galileo1 年前

yeah

Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT 的头像
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 年前

The sharps agree 👀

Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT 的头像
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 年前

I’m sure a lot of people will. It’s rookie hype szn after all @Marcus_Mosher mentioned his ~29 on the big board. I think Henderson>Hampton And that Hampton will be replaceable at his current talent level so why burn a first rounder on that if I’m an NFL team

Brett 的头像
Brett1 年前

Some of these listed weaknesses are things he actually excels at... Which begs the question... You good?

Val Dewar (Creole Maple Hot Sauce Enjoyer) 的头像
Val Dewar (Creole Maple Hot Sauce Enjoyer)1 年前

He still rb2 for ya?

Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT 的头像
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 年前

No

相关视频

OF Ethan Conrad (Wake Forest Baseball) has seen his Draft stock rise considerably over the last calendar year. Following a productive Freshman season and summer, Conrad had an outstanding Sophomore year to the tune of a .389/.467/.704 slash line with 18 2B, a nation-leading 13 3B, 9 HR, 52 RBIs and 17 SB. His hot hitting didn't stop there, though, as on the Cape this summer he was both an All-Star (ASG MVP) and All-League selection after hitting .385/.433/.486 with 5 2B, 2 HR, 19 RBIs, and 19 SB. Conrad has an athletic, big league frame at 6'3" and 200-lbs. Simple setup in the box in which he stands fairly upright—albeit slightly hunched over—with a medium-high handset and holds the bat flat over his back shoulder. Minimal load, leg lift leads into a small stride. Conrad takes a direct path to contact and his barrel accelerates through the zone. Hand speed is above-average. It's a very compact, repeatable and under control operation. He has plus bat-to-ball skills and is consistently on the barrel. Last spring he ran an overall IZ contact rate of 91%, including 90% against FB and 94% against both SL and CH. This summer was a similar story, as his overall IZ contact rate was also 91% (93% against FB/CH, 91% against SL). Conrad can get trigger happy with FB in the top and/or outer-1/3 and has the tendency to chase secondaries down, though it hasn't hindered his production to this point. Tightening up his swing decisions a bit will help. Would give his hit tool a 55. Conrad has shown the ability to spray line drives to all parts of the field and is capable of driving the baseball into either gap. While he uses the whole field, his highest quality of contact comes to the pull side—which is also where all of his HR power to this point has come. There's present impact, however, and this spring he posted a Max EV of 109.4 and this summer his Max EV was 105.4. If he's able to get the ball up in the air more, increased HR numbers should follow suit. Power is a 50 right now. Corner OF profile defensively where his speed and athleticism translate well. Good instincts, can go and get balls in the gap or down the line. Arm is average. Alluded to it, but Conrad is also a plus runner who has a knack for taking an extra base on a ball in the gap or down the line. Most importantly, he knows *how* to run which helps his speed play up on the bases where he's an effective base stealer and chaos-causer. There's a lot to like tools-wise with Conrad and he figures to be the centerpiece of Wake Forest's lineup in 2025. Definite day 1 type this July, top-40 overall upside. (📽️: Marist Baseball)
0:24

OF Ethan Conrad (Wake Forest Baseball) has seen his Draft stock rise considerably over the last calendar year. Following a productive Freshman season and summer, Conrad had an outstanding Sophomore year to the tune of a .389/.467/.704 slash line with 18 2B, a nation-leading 13 3B, 9 HR, 52 RBIs and 17 SB. His hot hitting didn't stop there, though, as on the Cape this summer he was both an All-Star (ASG MVP) and All-League selection after hitting .385/.433/.486 with 5 2B, 2 HR, 19 RBIs, and 19 SB. Conrad has an athletic, big league frame at 6'3" and 200-lbs. Simple setup in the box in which he stands fairly upright—albeit slightly hunched over—with a medium-high handset and holds the bat flat over his back shoulder. Minimal load, leg lift leads into a small stride. Conrad takes a direct path to contact and his barrel accelerates through the zone. Hand speed is above-average. It's a very compact, repeatable and under control operation. He has plus bat-to-ball skills and is consistently on the barrel. Last spring he ran an overall IZ contact rate of 91%, including 90% against FB and 94% against both SL and CH. This summer was a similar story, as his overall IZ contact rate was also 91% (93% against FB/CH, 91% against SL). Conrad can get trigger happy with FB in the top and/or outer-1/3 and has the tendency to chase secondaries down, though it hasn't hindered his production to this point. Tightening up his swing decisions a bit will help. Would give his hit tool a 55. Conrad has shown the ability to spray line drives to all parts of the field and is capable of driving the baseball into either gap. While he uses the whole field, his highest quality of contact comes to the pull side—which is also where all of his HR power to this point has come. There's present impact, however, and this spring he posted a Max EV of 109.4 and this summer his Max EV was 105.4. If he's able to get the ball up in the air more, increased HR numbers should follow suit. Power is a 50 right now. Corner OF profile defensively where his speed and athleticism translate well. Good instincts, can go and get balls in the gap or down the line. Arm is average. Alluded to it, but Conrad is also a plus runner who has a knack for taking an extra base on a ball in the gap or down the line. Most importantly, he knows *how* to run which helps his speed play up on the bases where he's an effective base stealer and chaos-causer. There's a lot to like tools-wise with Conrad and he figures to be the centerpiece of Wake Forest's lineup in 2025. Definite day 1 type this July, top-40 overall upside. (📽️: Marist Baseball)

Peter Flaherty III

22,107 次观看 • 1 年前

OF COURSE ISRAEL WAS INVOLVED IN THE ASS*SSINATION OF CHARLIE KIRK. Let me explain why. 🔖& share this. In November 2023, a leaked call from Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL revealed a "major generational problem" regarding declining support for israel in America. He revealed polling that showed it wasn't "Left vs. Right," but it was "young vs. old." He called this the "TikTok problem," or the "Gen Z problem." He called Gen Z "useful idiots" and said the "real game" was to solve this problem. He called for the jewish community to put their collective brains together to solve this generational problem. Here's what we know they did: 1. They immediately pressured Tiktok to increase censorship. In November 2023 alone, TikTok deleted over 900,000 pro-Palestine videos. They also blocked various hashtags, including "israel did 911." 2. They mobilized a high-pressure campaign against the Ivy League campuses that were the epicenter of pro-Palestine protests & activism. Several university presidents were punished & replaced by jews and/or zionists willing to suppress free speech. (We must note that this campus activism was driven by Leftist organizations. This will be important later.) 3. They lobbied congress, which then passed new laws suppressing & punishing campus free speech & demonstrations classified as "antisemitic." 4. They lobbied congress to outright shut down & ban Tiktok, which congress obliged. However, Trump ended up "saving" TikTok, which was then forced to sell itself to a consortium of pro-israel jewish billionaires, led principally by uber-zionist Larry Ellison. That sale went through on September 16, 2025—6 days after Charlie Kirk was ass*ssinated. 5. In early 2025, the newly-installed Trump administration threatened to withhold $Hundreds of Millions in federal aid to several universities unless they put "safeguards" in place preventing the outbreak of pro-Palestinian activism (again defined as "antisemitism"). 6. In 2025, israel, through organizations like Israel365, started spending $Millions on sending hundreds of American "influencers" to israel in order to get them promoting the zionist cause and rehabilitating israel's image. 7. In 2025, Netanyahu launched Israel's "8th-Front" Information Warfare campaign, targeting the social media & AI landscape in the United States. Israel has earmarked an additional $729 million in FY2026 for these operations. 8. Zionist billionaires took over the entire CBS/Paramount media ecosystem in August 2025. (And they've just now added the entire Warner Bros. Discovery ecosystem, which they've also been pursuing since the fall of 2025). But despite all of this, israel had a problem. Call it the Charlie Kirk TPUSA problem. ▪️Charlie led a campus organization for youth ON THE RIGHT, with 600k+ lifetime members, and 250k+ active members. The largest organization of its kind, completely beholden to his leadership. ▪️Charlie generated billions of views on Tiktok & across the social media landscape, and was firmly opposed to censorship of all kinds including and explicitly speech critical of israel. ▪️Charlie was completely critical of the ADL, calling for its ban on social media & diametrically opposing its calls for more censorship. ▪️Charlie was extremely outspoken and critical of Left-wing jewish activism, which he blamed for the radical, open-borders Marxism ruining the country. ▪️Charlie actively asserted his massive influence to oppose regime-change war in Iran, pressuring Donald Trump inside the Whitehouse itself. ▪️Charlie was becoming increasingly critical of israel & zionism: questioning the suspicious events of 10/7, openly platforming debates against zionism, & himself leading discussions that advocated for cutting aid to israel, releasing the Epstein files, and calling for AIPAC to be registered as a foreign agent under FARA. It should be noted that demanding FARA registration of the israel lobby was one of the actions that got JFK ass*ssinated by the same people. ▪️Charlie was giving TPUSA platform access to powerful israel-critical voices like Tucker Carlson & Dave Smith, and intended to expand that to include Candace Owens. You have seen how ape-sh*t crazy they're going over Tucker & Candace—people who were telling the truth about Epstein & israeli control over the US government and also discouraging war with Iran. ▪️We now also know that Charlie was done with the pro-israel cause and had been signaling his intent to drop it. We have the leaked text, but that didn't happen in a vacuum. That was no doubt the culmination of a lot of momentum in that direction. Here's what I want you to realize if you haven't already: Charlie Kirk was single-handedly undoing or undercutting every move israel & organized jewry had made over the previous 2 years to solve the "Gen Z problem." Remember how organized campus opposition to israel came from the Left? Well here came Charlie Kirk re-platforming it on the Right! Charlie had transformed TPUSA into a Trojan horse—allowing & amplifying everything they'd sought to eliminate from the Left! Charlie Kirk was a massive roadblock to the jewish plan to re-conquer the minds of the youth of America. He was literally AND figuratively the Big Man On Campus. The most influential man in America on the youth. He was allowing and accelerating the rising generation to be radically anti-israel while simultaneously being "Conservative Republicans" in good standing who wouldn't be canceled. THE PLAN The israel-network tried several (ineffective) methods to solve the Charlie Kirk TPUSA problem. 1. They tried to quietly & privately influence him in private with through people like Josh Hammer & Rabbi Wolicki, and surround him with pro-zionists like Rob McCoy & Frank Turek. 2. They launched a high-pressure influence operation against him, which culminated in a 2-day "moral blackmail" event in the Hamptons. He took to the media to denounce these efforts. 3. They tried to outright buy him off when Netanyahu offered $150 million. He refused. 4. They tried to force his hand by pulling funding—notable was the $2 million withdrawn by Robert Shillman. He responded by launching a DOGE effort to shore up the finances and by announcing his intentions to leave the pro-israel cause. In summary: they dragged him privately & publicly; they blackmailed him; and then they tried to buy him. Nothing worked. He deflected everything, said 'NO,' and fought off all the attacks. He had resolved to find a new way forward with the new financial situation. Is there any doubt he would have succeeded? That left the israel-jewish network with only one option—an option that time-and-time-again they've been all too willing to resort to. Don't come at me with "Charlie Kirk supported israel!" and "Charlie Kirk loved the jews!" nonsense. John F. Kennedy also supported israel and embraced the jews. But there was a conflict: he put America first. And so did Charlie Kirk. My facts are true. And my logic is sound. I won't hear of this "lone gunman" nonsense any more. Miss me with the "Some random kid all by himself drove 300 miles on a week's notice, shoved a 110-year old gun down his pants, walked onto a roof directly in front of Charlie, delivered a perfect 1-shot/1-kill, escaped with no problem, and then immediately texted the whole plan to his furry roommate." israel would not be able to take this country to war against Iran if Charlie Kirk were still alive today. Period. I don't care how much he loved jews on a personal level. The hostile takeover of TPUSA was every bit as necessary as the hostile takeover of Tiktok and the Ivy league universities. Either you believe israel was the recipient of the most timely, fantastic stroke of geopolitical good luck ever, or you realize that Jonathan Greenblatt's injunction to take back Gen Z has been fulfilled in practically every particular.
1:14

OF COURSE ISRAEL WAS INVOLVED IN THE ASS*SSINATION OF CHARLIE KIRK. Let me explain why. 🔖& share this. In November 2023, a leaked call from Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL revealed a "major generational problem" regarding declining support for israel in America. He revealed polling that showed it wasn't "Left vs. Right," but it was "young vs. old." He called this the "TikTok problem," or the "Gen Z problem." He called Gen Z "useful idiots" and said the "real game" was to solve this problem. He called for the jewish community to put their collective brains together to solve this generational problem. Here's what we know they did: 1. They immediately pressured Tiktok to increase censorship. In November 2023 alone, TikTok deleted over 900,000 pro-Palestine videos. They also blocked various hashtags, including "israel did 911." 2. They mobilized a high-pressure campaign against the Ivy League campuses that were the epicenter of pro-Palestine protests & activism. Several university presidents were punished & replaced by jews and/or zionists willing to suppress free speech. (We must note that this campus activism was driven by Leftist organizations. This will be important later.) 3. They lobbied congress, which then passed new laws suppressing & punishing campus free speech & demonstrations classified as "antisemitic." 4. They lobbied congress to outright shut down & ban Tiktok, which congress obliged. However, Trump ended up "saving" TikTok, which was then forced to sell itself to a consortium of pro-israel jewish billionaires, led principally by uber-zionist Larry Ellison. That sale went through on September 16, 2025—6 days after Charlie Kirk was ass*ssinated. 5. In early 2025, the newly-installed Trump administration threatened to withhold $Hundreds of Millions in federal aid to several universities unless they put "safeguards" in place preventing the outbreak of pro-Palestinian activism (again defined as "antisemitism"). 6. In 2025, israel, through organizations like Israel365, started spending $Millions on sending hundreds of American "influencers" to israel in order to get them promoting the zionist cause and rehabilitating israel's image. 7. In 2025, Netanyahu launched Israel's "8th-Front" Information Warfare campaign, targeting the social media & AI landscape in the United States. Israel has earmarked an additional $729 million in FY2026 for these operations. 8. Zionist billionaires took over the entire CBS/Paramount media ecosystem in August 2025. (And they've just now added the entire Warner Bros. Discovery ecosystem, which they've also been pursuing since the fall of 2025). But despite all of this, israel had a problem. Call it the Charlie Kirk TPUSA problem. ▪️Charlie led a campus organization for youth ON THE RIGHT, with 600k+ lifetime members, and 250k+ active members. The largest organization of its kind, completely beholden to his leadership. ▪️Charlie generated billions of views on Tiktok & across the social media landscape, and was firmly opposed to censorship of all kinds including and explicitly speech critical of israel. ▪️Charlie was completely critical of the ADL, calling for its ban on social media & diametrically opposing its calls for more censorship. ▪️Charlie was extremely outspoken and critical of Left-wing jewish activism, which he blamed for the radical, open-borders Marxism ruining the country. ▪️Charlie actively asserted his massive influence to oppose regime-change war in Iran, pressuring Donald Trump inside the Whitehouse itself. ▪️Charlie was becoming increasingly critical of israel & zionism: questioning the suspicious events of 10/7, openly platforming debates against zionism, & himself leading discussions that advocated for cutting aid to israel, releasing the Epstein files, and calling for AIPAC to be registered as a foreign agent under FARA. It should be noted that demanding FARA registration of the israel lobby was one of the actions that got JFK ass*ssinated by the same people. ▪️Charlie was giving TPUSA platform access to powerful israel-critical voices like Tucker Carlson & Dave Smith, and intended to expand that to include Candace Owens. You have seen how ape-sh*t crazy they're going over Tucker & Candace—people who were telling the truth about Epstein & israeli control over the US government and also discouraging war with Iran. ▪️We now also know that Charlie was done with the pro-israel cause and had been signaling his intent to drop it. We have the leaked text, but that didn't happen in a vacuum. That was no doubt the culmination of a lot of momentum in that direction. Here's what I want you to realize if you haven't already: Charlie Kirk was single-handedly undoing or undercutting every move israel & organized jewry had made over the previous 2 years to solve the "Gen Z problem." Remember how organized campus opposition to israel came from the Left? Well here came Charlie Kirk re-platforming it on the Right! Charlie had transformed TPUSA into a Trojan horse—allowing & amplifying everything they'd sought to eliminate from the Left! Charlie Kirk was a massive roadblock to the jewish plan to re-conquer the minds of the youth of America. He was literally AND figuratively the Big Man On Campus. The most influential man in America on the youth. He was allowing and accelerating the rising generation to be radically anti-israel while simultaneously being "Conservative Republicans" in good standing who wouldn't be canceled. THE PLAN The israel-network tried several (ineffective) methods to solve the Charlie Kirk TPUSA problem. 1. They tried to quietly & privately influence him in private with through people like Josh Hammer & Rabbi Wolicki, and surround him with pro-zionists like Rob McCoy & Frank Turek. 2. They launched a high-pressure influence operation against him, which culminated in a 2-day "moral blackmail" event in the Hamptons. He took to the media to denounce these efforts. 3. They tried to outright buy him off when Netanyahu offered $150 million. He refused. 4. They tried to force his hand by pulling funding—notable was the $2 million withdrawn by Robert Shillman. He responded by launching a DOGE effort to shore up the finances and by announcing his intentions to leave the pro-israel cause. In summary: they dragged him privately & publicly; they blackmailed him; and then they tried to buy him. Nothing worked. He deflected everything, said 'NO,' and fought off all the attacks. He had resolved to find a new way forward with the new financial situation. Is there any doubt he would have succeeded? That left the israel-jewish network with only one option—an option that time-and-time-again they've been all too willing to resort to. Don't come at me with "Charlie Kirk supported israel!" and "Charlie Kirk loved the jews!" nonsense. John F. Kennedy also supported israel and embraced the jews. But there was a conflict: he put America first. And so did Charlie Kirk. My facts are true. And my logic is sound. I won't hear of this "lone gunman" nonsense any more. Miss me with the "Some random kid all by himself drove 300 miles on a week's notice, shoved a 110-year old gun down his pants, walked onto a roof directly in front of Charlie, delivered a perfect 1-shot/1-kill, escaped with no problem, and then immediately texted the whole plan to his furry roommate." israel would not be able to take this country to war against Iran if Charlie Kirk were still alive today. Period. I don't care how much he loved jews on a personal level. The hostile takeover of TPUSA was every bit as necessary as the hostile takeover of Tiktok and the Ivy league universities. Either you believe israel was the recipient of the most timely, fantastic stroke of geopolitical good luck ever, or you realize that Jonathan Greenblatt's injunction to take back Gen Z has been fulfilled in practically every particular.

Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯

299,143 次观看 • 4 个月前

This is the wrap up to my social experiment going undercover on a dating website as a man trying to get a good woman. (I meander more than a little, but hopefully you find some nuggets in here helpful.) These are the conclusions I've come to about why men are struggling so badly on these dating websites. Men face many battles women do not. 40% of female profiles are gold diggers, hookers or bots. Men greatly outnumber women, and they get discouraged quickly. Reasons men fail on dating websites: 1. Refusing to develop your communication skills. My generation has a phrase, "Don't hate the player, hate the game." Be funny, charming and fun, or don't cry when she picks someone else who is. 2. Half-assing your dating profile. Mating rituals exist in all walks of the animal kingdom, so if you refuse to show her why she should pick you then don't expect to be picked. We all sell ourselves to the opposite gender in some way. It's just a fact of human life, and whining about it won't serve you well, change that fact, or get the girl. 3. A cringeworthy user name. Sure, your frat buddies will find, "EatYouAllNight69" hilarious, but it's not going to get you anyone worth a damn. Trust me, high value women hate that. 4. You don't want a pen pal, so go in with the idea that your goal is to get her number and get her off that site as soon as possible, or someone else will. Women are desperate for a strong, masculine man she can trust to lead and protect her from the dragons at the gate. A nice guy is too weak and desperate to do it, and a jerk is just mean and abusive. Again, mating rituals exist in every walk of the animal kingdom and humans are no different. You will only get out of this life and a potential mate the effort you are willing to put in, and that includes developing your mind and body to be the best version of yourself. Not just for her, but for you too. A needy guy with low self-esteem is never going to get the girl. Good boundaries and a healthy self image equals success, so get back into the gym and start eating clean. The better you look the better you'll feel. The better you feel the more success in life you'll have. A 300lb girl with 5 kids with different fathers is never going to get a good man. Control your reproduction and stop being a wh*re. Despite what feminists tell you, girls, your body count does matter to him. Keep it low and maintain your dignity. Research has shown time and again that women are instinctively drawn to certain traits like bravery, intelligence, and a willingness to take risks. Basically, if it would keep you from getting voted off the island on Survivor, she’s going to think it’s hot. Make sure your profile highlights these kind of personality traits in an attractive way. Stop whining about height! We DGAF about how tall you are just so long as it's taller than us. Your insecurities will make you desperate, needy and totally hamstring your chances. Bottom line: Without effort don't expect success. In anything, really. You'll always find an excuse to stay exactly where you are and you'll only change your stars when the place your living becomes more painful/difficult then than they journey you need to take for a better life.
14:55

This is the wrap up to my social experiment going undercover on a dating website as a man trying to get a good woman. (I meander more than a little, but hopefully you find some nuggets in here helpful.) These are the conclusions I've come to about why men are struggling so badly on these dating websites. Men face many battles women do not. 40% of female profiles are gold diggers, hookers or bots. Men greatly outnumber women, and they get discouraged quickly. Reasons men fail on dating websites: 1. Refusing to develop your communication skills. My generation has a phrase, "Don't hate the player, hate the game." Be funny, charming and fun, or don't cry when she picks someone else who is. 2. Half-assing your dating profile. Mating rituals exist in all walks of the animal kingdom, so if you refuse to show her why she should pick you then don't expect to be picked. We all sell ourselves to the opposite gender in some way. It's just a fact of human life, and whining about it won't serve you well, change that fact, or get the girl. 3. A cringeworthy user name. Sure, your frat buddies will find, "EatYouAllNight69" hilarious, but it's not going to get you anyone worth a damn. Trust me, high value women hate that. 4. You don't want a pen pal, so go in with the idea that your goal is to get her number and get her off that site as soon as possible, or someone else will. Women are desperate for a strong, masculine man she can trust to lead and protect her from the dragons at the gate. A nice guy is too weak and desperate to do it, and a jerk is just mean and abusive. Again, mating rituals exist in every walk of the animal kingdom and humans are no different. You will only get out of this life and a potential mate the effort you are willing to put in, and that includes developing your mind and body to be the best version of yourself. Not just for her, but for you too. A needy guy with low self-esteem is never going to get the girl. Good boundaries and a healthy self image equals success, so get back into the gym and start eating clean. The better you look the better you'll feel. The better you feel the more success in life you'll have. A 300lb girl with 5 kids with different fathers is never going to get a good man. Control your reproduction and stop being a wh*re. Despite what feminists tell you, girls, your body count does matter to him. Keep it low and maintain your dignity. Research has shown time and again that women are instinctively drawn to certain traits like bravery, intelligence, and a willingness to take risks. Basically, if it would keep you from getting voted off the island on Survivor, she’s going to think it’s hot. Make sure your profile highlights these kind of personality traits in an attractive way. Stop whining about height! We DGAF about how tall you are just so long as it's taller than us. Your insecurities will make you desperate, needy and totally hamstring your chances. Bottom line: Without effort don't expect success. In anything, really. You'll always find an excuse to stay exactly where you are and you'll only change your stars when the place your living becomes more painful/difficult then than they journey you need to take for a better life.

TraderJill (Leigh)

205,793 次观看 • 2 年前

🦘🇦🇺My take on Ange Postecoglou. If you disagree, that's fine. Freedom of speech, your opinion might be listened to or not. Mine is, I know by who. That's what I care about. 🌏Postecoglou has coached every age group at national / international level on 3 continents. That's inspirational and commands respect, if he was to be found out, as he said, he'd have been a long time ago like these former pros who cry because they get a U19 team relegated (ask me the names). 🤓From a footballing standpoint, he's not making up theoretical shit like all these nerds jumping up on the Pro License barely coaching a team; and scrambling to figure out the reality of the sport/people in Phase 2, 3 doing the polar opposite to what they told everyone they'd do. 🧠The football Postecoglou sets up has room for decision making within a structure which is an extraordinary achievement from a coaching standpoint, and what every coach in the world should aspire to do. Ajax or Netherlands 1974, Nantes 1995, Rijkaard's Barcelona, Wenger's Arsenal. If you like "good football" , this is good football. If you want to win, pay more and get the best players. The correlation is right there. 🔁There's rotations everywhere (think triangles who tilt, carrier and two options short/long), and players have 2-3 options everytime. The right balance between combinations into feet and third man runs (third man runs are vital - and often forgotten when nerds coach teams and have a control kink) 🫡For that, you need a club culture of empowered players caring about the common good ; and also good enough to act selflessly to what the game demands (and actually execute it). ⚖️The challenge is that bang average off the mill pros do what they're told, can't do most things. And ones who can't do play the solo card - football is an individual sport masquerading as a team sport. 👀I can confidently second guess that the hesitation in collective movement suggest they're thinking in real time and not going "by the book" (which is microwave coaching). 👥How often Postecoglou talks about culture, turning up together for a meal before games. Old school, but actually grounded. This isn't a startup or UberEats. 🧘‍♂️There's a handful of adults coaching Premier League teams. Slot maybe, Howe, Emery, Frank, Glasner, Moyes, McKenna who value the holistic composition of performance: squad chemistry, work ethic, managing people and treating them as adults. Coincidence or not, I rate all of them. Coincidence, they all overperfom with the resources they have. 🚩Defensively, the idea to hold a high line can make sense on the occasion. Most of you don't work in football. People who do know the biggest paradox in the modern age is that lot of players are outstanding to think smart and execute fast in high pressure situations; yet are out of their depth when they have time and space to think. 🫣Chelsea 11v9 took half an hour to break down 9 fuckers on halfway line, and people know how badly it reflected on one of the worst assemblage of players ever seen pound for pound. And that's not Postecoglou's team. Then again, listen to who you want. I've done it too. 9v11 winning 5-2 from 2-1 down at National level whilst the other team was spamming diagonals out of play. 🚑The injury crisis is worrying, but it's also a vicious circle. Majority of clubs nowadays sign players to replace injured players. If you get one or two key players injured by the extreme random demands of the game (facing a Haaland, Jackson etc... stretches your CBs to the limit - Van de Ven got muscular in game injury like Rodri got injured like Fofana got injured). 🚁💰I don't think the training methods are in question; not should they be questioned more than Pep or Maresca's who can actually afford to get replacement brought in (and still get injuries) - and never get questioned. Spurs play Gray at CB. Chelsea can afford to call Chaloback, or City sign another 40 million a piece CB. 🕳️Spurs lost Kane and finished 5th, like nothing happened. That's outstanding. 📼⛳️Training clip: possession box to create the moment to change gear and find a striker dropping off the front. What happens then is a "wave" 3v2, with decision making. Drive diagonally, straight pass for diagonal runs. Affordances (what players perceive they can play) and match realism. See the cut off corners to guarantee runs going towards goal. Can't be more modern, evidence based, empowering, enjoyable and football realistic. 🏟️🎞️Game footage: look how they're using each pass as a timeline to allow a third man popping up in space. Good reaction on turnover. See another triangle being created, with players selflessly filling in the tips of the triangle even rotating. Matar Sarr gets sucked into the space, puts an outstanding goalmouth delivery with presence and bodies in the box - especially at the far post. Brennan who everyone called a flop. Tremendous, organic (= player led) output. What you can do = the team's outlook. ⚽️I'm talking football there, not theory, not pattern playbook, not fiscal optimisation. 📊Spurs are working on relative budget. Don't budget CL football. Spend 40% turnover on wages, when Chelsea's etc... are 70% or Leicester 120%. 🏇💉It's like the only clean horse in a race when others are stuffed with red bull, cocaine and creatine. And some of you Peaky Blinders are looking everywhere - even if you saw the episode where they stuff the horse to make it win.
1:05

🦘🇦🇺My take on Ange Postecoglou. If you disagree, that's fine. Freedom of speech, your opinion might be listened to or not. Mine is, I know by who. That's what I care about. 🌏Postecoglou has coached every age group at national / international level on 3 continents. That's inspirational and commands respect, if he was to be found out, as he said, he'd have been a long time ago like these former pros who cry because they get a U19 team relegated (ask me the names). 🤓From a footballing standpoint, he's not making up theoretical shit like all these nerds jumping up on the Pro License barely coaching a team; and scrambling to figure out the reality of the sport/people in Phase 2, 3 doing the polar opposite to what they told everyone they'd do. 🧠The football Postecoglou sets up has room for decision making within a structure which is an extraordinary achievement from a coaching standpoint, and what every coach in the world should aspire to do. Ajax or Netherlands 1974, Nantes 1995, Rijkaard's Barcelona, Wenger's Arsenal. If you like "good football" , this is good football. If you want to win, pay more and get the best players. The correlation is right there. 🔁There's rotations everywhere (think triangles who tilt, carrier and two options short/long), and players have 2-3 options everytime. The right balance between combinations into feet and third man runs (third man runs are vital - and often forgotten when nerds coach teams and have a control kink) 🫡For that, you need a club culture of empowered players caring about the common good ; and also good enough to act selflessly to what the game demands (and actually execute it). ⚖️The challenge is that bang average off the mill pros do what they're told, can't do most things. And ones who can't do play the solo card - football is an individual sport masquerading as a team sport. 👀I can confidently second guess that the hesitation in collective movement suggest they're thinking in real time and not going "by the book" (which is microwave coaching). 👥How often Postecoglou talks about culture, turning up together for a meal before games. Old school, but actually grounded. This isn't a startup or UberEats. 🧘‍♂️There's a handful of adults coaching Premier League teams. Slot maybe, Howe, Emery, Frank, Glasner, Moyes, McKenna who value the holistic composition of performance: squad chemistry, work ethic, managing people and treating them as adults. Coincidence or not, I rate all of them. Coincidence, they all overperfom with the resources they have. 🚩Defensively, the idea to hold a high line can make sense on the occasion. Most of you don't work in football. People who do know the biggest paradox in the modern age is that lot of players are outstanding to think smart and execute fast in high pressure situations; yet are out of their depth when they have time and space to think. 🫣Chelsea 11v9 took half an hour to break down 9 fuckers on halfway line, and people know how badly it reflected on one of the worst assemblage of players ever seen pound for pound. And that's not Postecoglou's team. Then again, listen to who you want. I've done it too. 9v11 winning 5-2 from 2-1 down at National level whilst the other team was spamming diagonals out of play. 🚑The injury crisis is worrying, but it's also a vicious circle. Majority of clubs nowadays sign players to replace injured players. If you get one or two key players injured by the extreme random demands of the game (facing a Haaland, Jackson etc... stretches your CBs to the limit - Van de Ven got muscular in game injury like Rodri got injured like Fofana got injured). 🚁💰I don't think the training methods are in question; not should they be questioned more than Pep or Maresca's who can actually afford to get replacement brought in (and still get injuries) - and never get questioned. Spurs play Gray at CB. Chelsea can afford to call Chaloback, or City sign another 40 million a piece CB. 🕳️Spurs lost Kane and finished 5th, like nothing happened. That's outstanding. 📼⛳️Training clip: possession box to create the moment to change gear and find a striker dropping off the front. What happens then is a "wave" 3v2, with decision making. Drive diagonally, straight pass for diagonal runs. Affordances (what players perceive they can play) and match realism. See the cut off corners to guarantee runs going towards goal. Can't be more modern, evidence based, empowering, enjoyable and football realistic. 🏟️🎞️Game footage: look how they're using each pass as a timeline to allow a third man popping up in space. Good reaction on turnover. See another triangle being created, with players selflessly filling in the tips of the triangle even rotating. Matar Sarr gets sucked into the space, puts an outstanding goalmouth delivery with presence and bodies in the box - especially at the far post. Brennan who everyone called a flop. Tremendous, organic (= player led) output. What you can do = the team's outlook. ⚽️I'm talking football there, not theory, not pattern playbook, not fiscal optimisation. 📊Spurs are working on relative budget. Don't budget CL football. Spend 40% turnover on wages, when Chelsea's etc... are 70% or Leicester 120%. 🏇💉It's like the only clean horse in a race when others are stuffed with red bull, cocaine and creatine. And some of you Peaky Blinders are looking everywhere - even if you saw the episode where they stuff the horse to make it win.

S.

228,505 次观看 • 1 年前

For over a year, Jeremy Howard has been in stealth mode. In this exclusive talk, he showcases what he's been working on. He & Jonathan Whitaker show us SolveIt, a new dev environment and programming paradigm. 🤯 Imagine this workflow: - Build a web app & interact with its UI on the same screen as your code. No more flipping to a separate browser. - Use live variables from your REPL directly in prompts to the AI. The AI knows your current state. - Turn any Python function into an AI tool instantly. No no registering tools or MCP. Just write a function in a cell and tell the AI to use it. This is a live, malleable environment that fuses the best ideas from Literate Programming (Knuth), the live-object world of Smalltalk, and the interactive cells of Jupyter. Who is Solveit for? Jeremy's take: SolveIt is best for programmers who are either very new ( 20 years). Why? Because developers in the middle (3-20 years) often have ingrained workflows and can find this different paradigm confronting. New devs are open-minded and build good habits from scratch, while veterans immediately recognize how this approach solves decades-old problems of complexity and state management. My Thoughts It's early days, but it is super cool. You get all the fun of trying a new programming language without learning new syntax (Python), because it will show you new patterns and ways of doing this. If you are wiling to climb the learning curve it is an extremely powerful tool that you can be productive with on real tasks like writing and coding. I'm personally addicted to it for several workflows and am afraid of losing it tbh. How Can You Try It? Just follow Jeremy Howard - he will announce something in the coming weeks or months (I suspect if this post is popular he might do something soon 🤣 ) TIMESTAMPS (00:00:00) - Introduction (00:00:30) - The SolveIt Method vs. "Vibe Coding" (00:04:00) - Investing in Yourself: Long-Term Skill Building (00:07:45) - Software Engineering vs. Short-Term Gains (00:12:15) - The Problem-Solving Loop: Understand, Plan, Implement, Review (00:18:50) - Example: Literate Programming with the Claudette Library (00:24:15) - First Look at the SolveIt Environment (00:28:34) - Demo Start: Building an Eval for Multimodal Models (00:31:16) - Iterative Development: Exploring the iNaturalist API (00:39:15) - Catching Bugs Instantly by Working Step-by-Step (00:43:37) - Prompting LLMs with Structured Outputs (00:51:54) - Demo: Building a Live Web App Inside SolveIt with FastHTML (01:00:24) - Demo: Exploring a Complex API (Cloudflare) (01:08:45) - Creating Custom AI Agent Tools with Zero Boilerplate (01:19:00) - SolveIt Ergonomics: Modes, Secrets, and Keyboard Shortcuts (01:28:30) - The Power of the SolveIt Community (01:30:45) - Who Should Use SolveIt? (01:34:30) - This is Just the Tip of the Iceberg YT Video and links in reply
1:36:14

For over a year, Jeremy Howard has been in stealth mode. In this exclusive talk, he showcases what he's been working on. He & Jonathan Whitaker show us SolveIt, a new dev environment and programming paradigm. 🤯 Imagine this workflow: - Build a web app & interact with its UI on the same screen as your code. No more flipping to a separate browser. - Use live variables from your REPL directly in prompts to the AI. The AI knows your current state. - Turn any Python function into an AI tool instantly. No no registering tools or MCP. Just write a function in a cell and tell the AI to use it. This is a live, malleable environment that fuses the best ideas from Literate Programming (Knuth), the live-object world of Smalltalk, and the interactive cells of Jupyter. Who is Solveit for? Jeremy's take: SolveIt is best for programmers who are either very new ( 20 years). Why? Because developers in the middle (3-20 years) often have ingrained workflows and can find this different paradigm confronting. New devs are open-minded and build good habits from scratch, while veterans immediately recognize how this approach solves decades-old problems of complexity and state management. My Thoughts It's early days, but it is super cool. You get all the fun of trying a new programming language without learning new syntax (Python), because it will show you new patterns and ways of doing this. If you are wiling to climb the learning curve it is an extremely powerful tool that you can be productive with on real tasks like writing and coding. I'm personally addicted to it for several workflows and am afraid of losing it tbh. How Can You Try It? Just follow Jeremy Howard - he will announce something in the coming weeks or months (I suspect if this post is popular he might do something soon 🤣 ) TIMESTAMPS (00:00:00) - Introduction (00:00:30) - The SolveIt Method vs. "Vibe Coding" (00:04:00) - Investing in Yourself: Long-Term Skill Building (00:07:45) - Software Engineering vs. Short-Term Gains (00:12:15) - The Problem-Solving Loop: Understand, Plan, Implement, Review (00:18:50) - Example: Literate Programming with the Claudette Library (00:24:15) - First Look at the SolveIt Environment (00:28:34) - Demo Start: Building an Eval for Multimodal Models (00:31:16) - Iterative Development: Exploring the iNaturalist API (00:39:15) - Catching Bugs Instantly by Working Step-by-Step (00:43:37) - Prompting LLMs with Structured Outputs (00:51:54) - Demo: Building a Live Web App Inside SolveIt with FastHTML (01:00:24) - Demo: Exploring a Complex API (Cloudflare) (01:08:45) - Creating Custom AI Agent Tools with Zero Boilerplate (01:19:00) - SolveIt Ergonomics: Modes, Secrets, and Keyboard Shortcuts (01:28:30) - The Power of the SolveIt Community (01:30:45) - Who Should Use SolveIt? (01:34:30) - This is Just the Tip of the Iceberg YT Video and links in reply

Hamel Husain

111,916 次观看 • 11 个月前

For the record, I am much more of a college basketball enthusiast than an NBA Draft expert. One thing that has stood out to me throughout this draft cycle, however, is how little Richie Saunders has been discussed relative to his production. Obviously, age, injury concerns, and a lack of elite physical tools have all limited his draft buzz. Those concerns are fair. Still, Saunders was nothing short of one of the most productive and efficient scorers in college basketball last season. Richie Saunders was one of only 10 Power Conference players last season to post a True Shooting Percentage of at least 63% while attempting 8.5 or more three-pointers per 40 minutes. Among that group, he ranked second in points per 40 minutes. Additionally, Saunders was one of only two players in that same group to also post a Free Throw Attempt Rate of at least 35%, highlighting not only his perimeter shooting ability but also his effectiveness at generating rim pressure. He also finished an impressive 67% of his attempts at the rim. The combination of high-volume shooting, elite efficiency, and consistent rim pressure provides a strong statistical foundation for his NBA projection. Saunders projects as a prototypical floor-spacing possession finisher at the NBA level. An overwhelming 90.5% of his field goal attempts last season came either at the rim or from beyond the three-point line, reflecting the type of shot profile NBA teams covet for his archetype. While Saunders was assisted on the majority of his made baskets, the numbers do not suggest a player who is completely dependent on others to create offense. 34.1% of his made two-point field goals were assisted (64th percentile) and 92.2% of his made three-pointers were assisted (65th percentile), reinforcing his projection as a high-level off-ball floor spacer. Saunders also converted 44.1% of his corner three-point attempts, another indicator that his shooting should translate well to an NBA role. Defense is unlikely to be Saunders' calling card at the next level, but there are indicators that suggest he can hold his own. While steal percentage can sometimes be misleading, Saunders posted a strong 3.1% STL%, which, when paired with his reported +5-inch wingspan, points toward solid anticipation and the ability to disrupt passing lanes on the perimeter. Additionally, his 0.93x Personal Foul Efficiency (90th percentile) is noteworthy. Saunders consistently avoided unnecessary fouls while remaining engaged defensively, a valuable trait for role players expected to stay on the floor. When projecting Saunders' offensive role, players such as Cameron Johnson, AJ Green, Max Strus, and Will Richard come to mind. This comparison is not necessarily about overall talent level, but rather the archetype: floor-spacing wings who thrive playing alongside higher-usage creators, make quick decisions, punish defensive mistakes, and provide offensive value without requiring heavy on-ball responsibility. With Saunders on the floor, BYU was better in nearly every meaningful offensive category. Most notably the following listed below. On/Off ORTG: 125.3/114.3 TS%: 59.6%/56.9% A:T Ratio: 1.39/1.06 The offensive improvements are significant, but what may be even more impressive is Saunders' ability to elevate the players around him. There may be no better example than fellow BYU star and potential No. 1 overall pick AJ Dybantsa. Dybantsa saw increases in TS%, 2P%, 3P%, and FTAr when sharing the floor with Saunders, illustrating the value of Saunders' spacing, gravity, and willingness to play within a complementary role. Elite complementary players are difficult to find, and Saunders consistently demonstrated an ability to make life easier for those around him. Saunders' floor-spacing ability is amplified by the speed of his release and his willingness to fire immediately off the catch. His ability to quickly get into his shot forces defenses to close out aggressively, creating additional opportunities for him to attack off the bounce. When defenders run him off the line, Saunders does an excellent job leveraging his shooting gravity to create straight-line drives to the rim. While he may not possess elite burst, he consistently capitalizes on defensive overreactions and attacks open space effectively. As someone who primarily evaluates college basketball rather than NBA draft boards, Richie Saunders has been one of the more surprising cases of this draft cycle. The concerns are understandable. He's older than the typical prospect, suffered a significant injury, and doesn't possess the type of elite physical tools that usually drive draft buzz. At the same time, it's difficult to ignore what Saunders actually produced on the court. He was one of the most efficient high-volume scorers in college basketball, combining elite shooting volume, strong rim finishing, and an ability to generate free throws at a level rarely seen from players who occupy a similar offensive role. His shot profile, floor-spacing ability, and offensive efficiency all align with the types of complementary wings that continue to carve out long NBA careers. Saunders may never be a primary creator or a player offenses are built around, but the NBA has consistently found value in wings who can space the floor, attack closeouts, make quick decisions, and fit seamlessly alongside stars. Whether he ultimately hears his name called in the late first round, second round, or enters the league through a two-way contract, Saunders feels like the type of prospect whose production and NBA-ready skill set could allow him to outperform his draft slot.
1:35

For the record, I am much more of a college basketball enthusiast than an NBA Draft expert. One thing that has stood out to me throughout this draft cycle, however, is how little Richie Saunders has been discussed relative to his production. Obviously, age, injury concerns, and a lack of elite physical tools have all limited his draft buzz. Those concerns are fair. Still, Saunders was nothing short of one of the most productive and efficient scorers in college basketball last season. Richie Saunders was one of only 10 Power Conference players last season to post a True Shooting Percentage of at least 63% while attempting 8.5 or more three-pointers per 40 minutes. Among that group, he ranked second in points per 40 minutes. Additionally, Saunders was one of only two players in that same group to also post a Free Throw Attempt Rate of at least 35%, highlighting not only his perimeter shooting ability but also his effectiveness at generating rim pressure. He also finished an impressive 67% of his attempts at the rim. The combination of high-volume shooting, elite efficiency, and consistent rim pressure provides a strong statistical foundation for his NBA projection. Saunders projects as a prototypical floor-spacing possession finisher at the NBA level. An overwhelming 90.5% of his field goal attempts last season came either at the rim or from beyond the three-point line, reflecting the type of shot profile NBA teams covet for his archetype. While Saunders was assisted on the majority of his made baskets, the numbers do not suggest a player who is completely dependent on others to create offense. 34.1% of his made two-point field goals were assisted (64th percentile) and 92.2% of his made three-pointers were assisted (65th percentile), reinforcing his projection as a high-level off-ball floor spacer. Saunders also converted 44.1% of his corner three-point attempts, another indicator that his shooting should translate well to an NBA role. Defense is unlikely to be Saunders' calling card at the next level, but there are indicators that suggest he can hold his own. While steal percentage can sometimes be misleading, Saunders posted a strong 3.1% STL%, which, when paired with his reported +5-inch wingspan, points toward solid anticipation and the ability to disrupt passing lanes on the perimeter. Additionally, his 0.93x Personal Foul Efficiency (90th percentile) is noteworthy. Saunders consistently avoided unnecessary fouls while remaining engaged defensively, a valuable trait for role players expected to stay on the floor. When projecting Saunders' offensive role, players such as Cameron Johnson, AJ Green, Max Strus, and Will Richard come to mind. This comparison is not necessarily about overall talent level, but rather the archetype: floor-spacing wings who thrive playing alongside higher-usage creators, make quick decisions, punish defensive mistakes, and provide offensive value without requiring heavy on-ball responsibility. With Saunders on the floor, BYU was better in nearly every meaningful offensive category. Most notably the following listed below. On/Off ORTG: 125.3/114.3 TS%: 59.6%/56.9% A:T Ratio: 1.39/1.06 The offensive improvements are significant, but what may be even more impressive is Saunders' ability to elevate the players around him. There may be no better example than fellow BYU star and potential No. 1 overall pick AJ Dybantsa. Dybantsa saw increases in TS%, 2P%, 3P%, and FTAr when sharing the floor with Saunders, illustrating the value of Saunders' spacing, gravity, and willingness to play within a complementary role. Elite complementary players are difficult to find, and Saunders consistently demonstrated an ability to make life easier for those around him. Saunders' floor-spacing ability is amplified by the speed of his release and his willingness to fire immediately off the catch. His ability to quickly get into his shot forces defenses to close out aggressively, creating additional opportunities for him to attack off the bounce. When defenders run him off the line, Saunders does an excellent job leveraging his shooting gravity to create straight-line drives to the rim. While he may not possess elite burst, he consistently capitalizes on defensive overreactions and attacks open space effectively. As someone who primarily evaluates college basketball rather than NBA draft boards, Richie Saunders has been one of the more surprising cases of this draft cycle. The concerns are understandable. He's older than the typical prospect, suffered a significant injury, and doesn't possess the type of elite physical tools that usually drive draft buzz. At the same time, it's difficult to ignore what Saunders actually produced on the court. He was one of the most efficient high-volume scorers in college basketball, combining elite shooting volume, strong rim finishing, and an ability to generate free throws at a level rarely seen from players who occupy a similar offensive role. His shot profile, floor-spacing ability, and offensive efficiency all align with the types of complementary wings that continue to carve out long NBA careers. Saunders may never be a primary creator or a player offenses are built around, but the NBA has consistently found value in wings who can space the floor, attack closeouts, make quick decisions, and fit seamlessly alongside stars. Whether he ultimately hears his name called in the late first round, second round, or enters the league through a two-way contract, Saunders feels like the type of prospect whose production and NBA-ready skill set could allow him to outperform his draft slot.

Caden Hoffman

115,806 次观看 • 1 个月前

Sometimes I like to look at a player’s “worst game of the year” to see how bad it was (or wasn’t). For WR Caleb Douglas (according to PFF) that was the Arizona State game where he matched up with Keith Abney (R5) all day. This was a good battle between Douglas and Abney. But considering it was supposed to be Douglas’s worst outing, it wasn’t all that bad. Texas Tech lost, despite coming back from a 12 point deficit in the final 6 or 7 minutes to take a 3 point lead, after a successful 2-point conversion made possible by Douglas drawing a hold in the end zone on the first 2-point attempt. Sam Leavitt and Jordyn Tyson worked their magic to go all the way down the field in the final minute and not just kick a tying FG, but actually score the go-ahead TD, leaving Texas Tech attempting a Hail Mary as the clock ran out. Things I noticed during the game: - The backup QB Will Hammond playing in place of Behren Morton had some issues with timing and ball placement. A couple of targets Douglas was open, Hammond missed him. Another one, instead of throwing the vertical Hammond patted the ball an extra beat and it threw off the timing. - I loved Caleb Douglas’s willingness to try and make a difference as a blocker. He got nasty with it. - Caleb had a bad drop. Abney got in there and contacted him and Douglas failed to put the ball away. But it’s interesting because Caleb also had one of the most impressive one-handed stabs you’ll see, on a play nobody noticed or cared about because it was a screen that didn’t break open. - On a lot of plays, if there wasn’t safety help, there was an egregious amount of cushion. This is something you see in a lot of Tech’s games. People had been trying, and frankly failing, to triangulate Douglas’s long speed, to where his 4.39 came as a surprise to some. And then when they’re wrong, the same tired excuse comes out, “He doesn’t play to his timed speed.” But the signs were always there. You had safeties stashed way out in the middle of nowhere to protect corners. You had corners giving 10-12 yards of cushion. - There was a lull where either the ball wasn’t coming Douglas’s way or it was inaccurate when it did, and it lasted nearly half the game. So I was looking for signs of Douglas checking out with his route running. That didn’t happen. He ran his routes hard the entire game. - Douglas dialed it up a notch during the comeback attempt at the end, particularly after the drop. He got wide open on a 3rd down vertical vs. physical coverage with no safety help over top (surviving an unflagged face mask in the process). Then he got open in the end zone twice, one of which forced a hold by Abney that did get flagged. I think the takeaway from me was, you’re playing against a good corner, you have a backup QB in, things don’t go well for you nor the offense for most of the game, but you stay locked in and make a difference at the end, mounting an unlikely comeback. I can see why Jon-Eric Sullivan would like his demeanor.
2:09

Sometimes I like to look at a player’s “worst game of the year” to see how bad it was (or wasn’t). For WR Caleb Douglas (according to PFF) that was the Arizona State game where he matched up with Keith Abney (R5) all day. This was a good battle between Douglas and Abney. But considering it was supposed to be Douglas’s worst outing, it wasn’t all that bad. Texas Tech lost, despite coming back from a 12 point deficit in the final 6 or 7 minutes to take a 3 point lead, after a successful 2-point conversion made possible by Douglas drawing a hold in the end zone on the first 2-point attempt. Sam Leavitt and Jordyn Tyson worked their magic to go all the way down the field in the final minute and not just kick a tying FG, but actually score the go-ahead TD, leaving Texas Tech attempting a Hail Mary as the clock ran out. Things I noticed during the game: - The backup QB Will Hammond playing in place of Behren Morton had some issues with timing and ball placement. A couple of targets Douglas was open, Hammond missed him. Another one, instead of throwing the vertical Hammond patted the ball an extra beat and it threw off the timing. - I loved Caleb Douglas’s willingness to try and make a difference as a blocker. He got nasty with it. - Caleb had a bad drop. Abney got in there and contacted him and Douglas failed to put the ball away. But it’s interesting because Caleb also had one of the most impressive one-handed stabs you’ll see, on a play nobody noticed or cared about because it was a screen that didn’t break open. - On a lot of plays, if there wasn’t safety help, there was an egregious amount of cushion. This is something you see in a lot of Tech’s games. People had been trying, and frankly failing, to triangulate Douglas’s long speed, to where his 4.39 came as a surprise to some. And then when they’re wrong, the same tired excuse comes out, “He doesn’t play to his timed speed.” But the signs were always there. You had safeties stashed way out in the middle of nowhere to protect corners. You had corners giving 10-12 yards of cushion. - There was a lull where either the ball wasn’t coming Douglas’s way or it was inaccurate when it did, and it lasted nearly half the game. So I was looking for signs of Douglas checking out with his route running. That didn’t happen. He ran his routes hard the entire game. - Douglas dialed it up a notch during the comeback attempt at the end, particularly after the drop. He got wide open on a 3rd down vertical vs. physical coverage with no safety help over top (surviving an unflagged face mask in the process). Then he got open in the end zone twice, one of which forced a hold by Abney that did get flagged. I think the takeaway from me was, you’re playing against a good corner, you have a backup QB in, things don’t go well for you nor the offense for most of the game, but you stay locked in and make a difference at the end, mounting an unlikely comeback. I can see why Jon-Eric Sullivan would like his demeanor.

Chris Kouffman

38,519 次观看 • 2 个月前

This 6-minute video reveals how Elon Musk learns complex topics: Elon Musk: “You don’t need college for learning.” “Everything is available basically for free. You can learn anything you want for free. It is not a question of learning.” Musk starts with a blunt point: College may still have value, but not for the reason most people think. He says the real signal of college is not intelligence. It is proof that someone can work through structure: “Can somebody work hard at something, including a bunch of sort of annoying homework assignments, and still do their homework assignments, and kind of soldier through and get it done?” That, in his view, is one of the main things a degree demonstrates: Discipline. Compliance. Follow-through. Not necessarily exceptional ability. Musk pushes the idea even further: “Colleges are basically for fun and to prove you can do your chores. But they’re not for learning.” Whether or not you agree with him fully, the underlying point is hard to ignore: We live in a time when knowledge is no longer locked inside institutions. The internet has dismantled the old gatekeeping model. Today, if someone wants to learn design, engineering, writing, sales, coding, marketing, or history, they can access world-class information without ever stepping into a lecture hall. The bottleneck is no longer access to information. It is desire. Focus. Curiosity. Consistency. Musk then draws a distinction that matters: “If you’re trying to do something exceptional, there must be evidence of exceptional ability.” That line changes the whole conversation. Because in real life, people do not reward credentials alone. They reward proof. Not what you enrolled in. What you built. Not what you intended to do. What you finished. Not what you say you know. What you can demonstrate. This is why portfolios outperform claims. Why execution beats prestige. Why visible work creates leverage. Musk even says, somewhat provocatively: “I don’t consider going to college evidence of exceptional ability.” And then he points to the kinds of examples people love to cite: “Gates is a pretty smart guy, he dropped out. John was pretty smart, he dropped out. Larry Ellison, smart guy, he dropped out.” His broader message is not that everyone should leave school. It is that conventional paths are not the only paths to intelligence, capability, or impact. Then Musk moves into something even more useful: His view of how people actually learn. “Education should be as close to a video game as possible. Like a good video game. You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day.” That comparison is simple, but powerful. Why do people obsess over games? Because games are interactive. They are immersive. They provide immediate feedback. They make progress visible. They create challenge without making the challenge feel meaningless. Musk’s point is that learning should work the same way. “If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do.” This is where traditional education often breaks down. Students are expected to move in lockstep. Same pace. Same timeline. Same structure. Same sequence. Musk rejects that model completely: “People are not objects on an assembly line.” That may be one of the clearest criticisms in the entire transcript. Because standard education often optimizes for administration, not human variation. It is easier to manage people in batches. But easier to manage does not mean better to learn. Some people move faster in math. Some are stronger in language. Some are highly visual. Some need to touch the thing, build the thing, test the thing. And yet most systems still treat learning like synchronized marching. Musk argues for something more individualized: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in in each subject.” That idea matters beyond school. Adults learn this way too. No one becomes exceptional by waiting for permission to move at average speed. The most effective learners usually follow interest with intensity. They go deeper where curiosity pulls them. They accelerate where energy is highest. They build momentum through engagement, not force. Musk also shares one of the most practical ideas in the transcript: “Teach problem solving, or teach to the problem, not to the tools.” Then he gives an example. If you wanted to teach someone how engines work, the traditional system might start with separate lessons on screwdrivers, wrenches, and tools. Musk thinks that is backwards. A better method is: “Here’s the engine. Now let’s take it apart.” Then the tools become relevant in context. Now the student understands *why* the screwdriver matters. Now the wrench has meaning. Now the lesson is connected to reality. This is a much bigger principle than education. People learn faster when relevance is obvious. Abstract instruction is forgettable. Applied learning sticks. When people can see the problem first, they care about the tool. That is true in business too. You do not start with theory for theory’s sake. You start with the problem that needs solving. Then you learn exactly what is required to solve it. Finally, Musk says something that quietly explains why so much education fails: “A lot of things people learn, probably there’s no point in learning them because they never use them in the future.” That may sound harsh, but most people know the feeling. They do not resist learning because they are lazy. They resist learning because it feels disconnected. They are told to memorize before they understand relevance. They are told to sit still before they become curious. They are told to absorb information before they have any reason to care. Musk’s view, underneath the provocation, is actually simple: People learn best when learning is alive. When it is tied to action. When it respects differences in pace and aptitude. When it feels engaging instead of ceremonial. When it produces visible competence, not just paper credentials. The internet made learning abundant. What matters now is whether someone can turn information into evidence. That is the real separator. Lessons I'm taking away from this clip: 1. In today’s world, access to knowledge is cheap. Proof of skill is expensive. We have crossed a point where information alone is no longer impressive because everyone has access to it. You can watch the best interviews, read the best essays, take the best online lessons, and still remain average if you never turn any of it into real work. So the advantage now is not “I know this.” The advantage is “I built this, tested this, shipped this, and can show the result.” From my perspective, this is especially true in business and personal branding. The market rewards visible competence far more than silent knowledge. 2. People learn faster when the learning feels useful, alive, and connected to a real problem. This is why so many people struggle with conventional education but thrive when they start building something for themselves. Urgency creates focus. Relevance creates retention. Once the lesson is attached to a real outcome, the brain pays attention differently. That’s why I think one of the best ways to learn anything is to start a project that forces you to use the skill in public or in real life. Learning becomes sharper when there is something at stake. It stops being passive consumption and becomes active problem-solving. 3. The smartest people are often not the ones collecting credentials. They are the ones following curiosity with discipline. Exceptional people usually do not just learn what is assigned to them. They go where their interest is strongest and then they pursue it seriously. That combination matters: curiosity without discipline goes nowhere, and discipline without curiosity becomes lifeless. The sweet spot is when someone becomes obsessed enough to keep going deeper than required. To me, that is where the real edge comes from. Not from following the default path better than everyone else, but from developing uncommon depth in something that genuinely pulls you.
6:13

This 6-minute video reveals how Elon Musk learns complex topics: Elon Musk: “You don’t need college for learning.” “Everything is available basically for free. You can learn anything you want for free. It is not a question of learning.” Musk starts with a blunt point: College may still have value, but not for the reason most people think. He says the real signal of college is not intelligence. It is proof that someone can work through structure: “Can somebody work hard at something, including a bunch of sort of annoying homework assignments, and still do their homework assignments, and kind of soldier through and get it done?” That, in his view, is one of the main things a degree demonstrates: Discipline. Compliance. Follow-through. Not necessarily exceptional ability. Musk pushes the idea even further: “Colleges are basically for fun and to prove you can do your chores. But they’re not for learning.” Whether or not you agree with him fully, the underlying point is hard to ignore: We live in a time when knowledge is no longer locked inside institutions. The internet has dismantled the old gatekeeping model. Today, if someone wants to learn design, engineering, writing, sales, coding, marketing, or history, they can access world-class information without ever stepping into a lecture hall. The bottleneck is no longer access to information. It is desire. Focus. Curiosity. Consistency. Musk then draws a distinction that matters: “If you’re trying to do something exceptional, there must be evidence of exceptional ability.” That line changes the whole conversation. Because in real life, people do not reward credentials alone. They reward proof. Not what you enrolled in. What you built. Not what you intended to do. What you finished. Not what you say you know. What you can demonstrate. This is why portfolios outperform claims. Why execution beats prestige. Why visible work creates leverage. Musk even says, somewhat provocatively: “I don’t consider going to college evidence of exceptional ability.” And then he points to the kinds of examples people love to cite: “Gates is a pretty smart guy, he dropped out. John was pretty smart, he dropped out. Larry Ellison, smart guy, he dropped out.” His broader message is not that everyone should leave school. It is that conventional paths are not the only paths to intelligence, capability, or impact. Then Musk moves into something even more useful: His view of how people actually learn. “Education should be as close to a video game as possible. Like a good video game. You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day.” That comparison is simple, but powerful. Why do people obsess over games? Because games are interactive. They are immersive. They provide immediate feedback. They make progress visible. They create challenge without making the challenge feel meaningless. Musk’s point is that learning should work the same way. “If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do.” This is where traditional education often breaks down. Students are expected to move in lockstep. Same pace. Same timeline. Same structure. Same sequence. Musk rejects that model completely: “People are not objects on an assembly line.” That may be one of the clearest criticisms in the entire transcript. Because standard education often optimizes for administration, not human variation. It is easier to manage people in batches. But easier to manage does not mean better to learn. Some people move faster in math. Some are stronger in language. Some are highly visual. Some need to touch the thing, build the thing, test the thing. And yet most systems still treat learning like synchronized marching. Musk argues for something more individualized: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in in each subject.” That idea matters beyond school. Adults learn this way too. No one becomes exceptional by waiting for permission to move at average speed. The most effective learners usually follow interest with intensity. They go deeper where curiosity pulls them. They accelerate where energy is highest. They build momentum through engagement, not force. Musk also shares one of the most practical ideas in the transcript: “Teach problem solving, or teach to the problem, not to the tools.” Then he gives an example. If you wanted to teach someone how engines work, the traditional system might start with separate lessons on screwdrivers, wrenches, and tools. Musk thinks that is backwards. A better method is: “Here’s the engine. Now let’s take it apart.” Then the tools become relevant in context. Now the student understands *why* the screwdriver matters. Now the wrench has meaning. Now the lesson is connected to reality. This is a much bigger principle than education. People learn faster when relevance is obvious. Abstract instruction is forgettable. Applied learning sticks. When people can see the problem first, they care about the tool. That is true in business too. You do not start with theory for theory’s sake. You start with the problem that needs solving. Then you learn exactly what is required to solve it. Finally, Musk says something that quietly explains why so much education fails: “A lot of things people learn, probably there’s no point in learning them because they never use them in the future.” That may sound harsh, but most people know the feeling. They do not resist learning because they are lazy. They resist learning because it feels disconnected. They are told to memorize before they understand relevance. They are told to sit still before they become curious. They are told to absorb information before they have any reason to care. Musk’s view, underneath the provocation, is actually simple: People learn best when learning is alive. When it is tied to action. When it respects differences in pace and aptitude. When it feels engaging instead of ceremonial. When it produces visible competence, not just paper credentials. The internet made learning abundant. What matters now is whether someone can turn information into evidence. That is the real separator. Lessons I'm taking away from this clip: 1. In today’s world, access to knowledge is cheap. Proof of skill is expensive. We have crossed a point where information alone is no longer impressive because everyone has access to it. You can watch the best interviews, read the best essays, take the best online lessons, and still remain average if you never turn any of it into real work. So the advantage now is not “I know this.” The advantage is “I built this, tested this, shipped this, and can show the result.” From my perspective, this is especially true in business and personal branding. The market rewards visible competence far more than silent knowledge. 2. People learn faster when the learning feels useful, alive, and connected to a real problem. This is why so many people struggle with conventional education but thrive when they start building something for themselves. Urgency creates focus. Relevance creates retention. Once the lesson is attached to a real outcome, the brain pays attention differently. That’s why I think one of the best ways to learn anything is to start a project that forces you to use the skill in public or in real life. Learning becomes sharper when there is something at stake. It stops being passive consumption and becomes active problem-solving. 3. The smartest people are often not the ones collecting credentials. They are the ones following curiosity with discipline. Exceptional people usually do not just learn what is assigned to them. They go where their interest is strongest and then they pursue it seriously. That combination matters: curiosity without discipline goes nowhere, and discipline without curiosity becomes lifeless. The sweet spot is when someone becomes obsessed enough to keep going deeper than required. To me, that is where the real edge comes from. Not from following the default path better than everyone else, but from developing uncommon depth in something that genuinely pulls you.

Yasmine Khosrowshahi

34,166 次观看 • 3 个月前

This video is propaganda. It functioned to keep Sargon in beer money, and the population of the UK in denial about race. Like all good lies, it contains elements of truth, of which Sargon supplies massive helpings - far more than most propagandists ever dare - but it's effective... The first two minutes and 32 seconds are all true, by which time your brain trusts him, and you see him as being on your side as a White native Englishman. Of course right from the start he picks the easiest of targets (put a box of cornflakes next to a Guardian journalist and it will look like a patriot). And then (at 2:33) you get: "...but luckily for everyone else, being English is not just about being a race...". He continues: "...it's a particular way of viewing the world much as anything else", "...saying that I as an individual matter; every human matters". Of course Carl is not in any way wrong to identify and celebrate various English cultural artefacts as English, nor is he wrong to identify them as cultural, but the trick being done is to cut away their moorings from the DNA of the people who created them. You don't see him doing it, but he's in the water, scuba-diving down with a knife between his teeth, towards the tethers... ...And sure enough, at 5:19, in a mocking sneering smug tone: "But anyway Maya, let's get back to 'racial politics'. Let's not talk about values or ideas or ideals, or things that actually make the world a better place: let's get back to your fucking racial politics" (building to an angry exasperated tone). And suddenly there we are. 😐 The culture in which we were all being encouraged to take pride and admire now floats entirely free of its genetic substrate. Racial politics is bad, and associated in your brain with Guardian journalists. This - our - culture which the bodies and brains of our ancestors built, is now some sort of magic pink sparkly cloud hovering just above the ground, into which Indians and Africans can walk serenely and thereby be sort of transformed into us, nearly, just so long as it's done at a slow responsible pace. At 5:54 Sargon continues his imaginary conversation with Maya of The Guardian, adopting a super-confident and mildly exasperated lecturing tone (his favourite mode of address, obviously), and says: "But Maya, immigrants are not just a race; there are many hundreds of thousands of immigrants from France, and if you go to London, to an area which is predominantly populated by French people, it would not be sensible to say 'well this is an English area of London', is it, and yet that's nothing to do with their race, because they, like you will obviously point out, are White...". Well hang on Carl, yes, they are all White, and so maybe the thing making it (as you say) "not-sensible" to say they should not be in London doesn't become non-racial. Looks like you just talked yourself there in an illogical way. They are all White. Maybe this matters. Perhaps if we instead consider the prospect of adding the same number (many hundreds of thousands) of subsaharan Africans to London rather than Frenchmen, now it would be very sensible indeed to say they should not be there, whence the sensible - racial - criterion is plain to see. A full essay on the evolution of human nature in geographically isolated regions and the neurodiversity which emerged from that is beyond the scope of this tweet, but suffice to say White culture is what you get from White people, and African culture is what you get from African people. Europeans are White, and the relative closeness among European countries and cultures (compared to subsaharan Africans) by most metrics you might care about is not a coincidence, since heritable biological traits actually exist and actually matter, and they are not distributed evenly between different racial groups (see Fst distance), ergo race matters. Carl is a master of tugging at heartstrings, talking about these "past generations of blacks" who "admired English culture", and "wanted to be like us" etc.. Yes, no doubt many such individuals existed. They were always exceptional though, and we know they were exceptional, because if they weren't then Africa today would basically be similar to Yorkshire, just with nicer weather. And the problem for Carl is that Africa is obviously not like that, nor does any population of blacks anywhere in the world behave as a group like Europeans. I don't care particularly about John Cleese or what he says or where he goes, so the rest of the video is not terribly interesting, but just note at 6:48 Carl talks in approving terms of how "a small number of immigrants is OK", but "an overwhelming flood is pushing that principle too far". The problem with that is the number of non-Whites already in Britain was crazy-high in 2019 when Carl made this video, and our children were already well on track to becoming minorities in British schools without adding a single immigrant, even back then. Horrible racial conflict has been rife across the capital at least since the 90s, and it would be delusional to see the 1981 Brixton riots as anything but racial, ...and all this, and every sort of demographic vandalism besides, has come to pass PURELY because people who had advocated for racial politics in the 60s and 70s were successfully demonised by the media, just as Carl is doing in this video. The obvious foolishness of large numbers is like the obvious danger of lots of gunpowder compared to a small amount of gunpowder. It's not like the conflict magically goes away when the numbers are small. You just get White people lying to themselves and pushing discomfort down into their subconsciousness, and non-Whites sometimes (but by no means always) playing the game at first till their numbers become large enough. Pakistanis understood that cultural attitudes to child rape were different in our country, and so they assimilated by successfully hiding their child rape for about 20 or 30 years. Some White people even helped with that assimilation. The parts of our culture that Carl claims to want to promote (rule of law, freedom to criticise Islam, mutual respect, etc) is stuff that exists DESPITE the non-White population in the UK. It IS racial. And like of course it's racial. We are our DNA. Our culture was made by people, ...who were made by DNA. You can not make White people feel good - proudly talking up White culture - and then in the next breath sneer down your nose at those engaging in racial politics. It's a nasty (and given that Carl is not stupid, I have to suspect cynical) trick, the effect of which is to encourage a White audience to continue entertaining a suicidal and delusional belief in a tabula rasa model of human nature. His defenders will say "oh this is an old video, he's changed now...", and I am sure he is delighted that you believe so. Show me any example of him back-tracking on a single word of that though. I'll wait. I am writing this because I see what's happening to our population, and frankly anyone who isn't willing to recognise the need for racial politics is not your friend in this battle. If Carl has changed, then now would be a really great time to make that clear and come out on the side of Racial Nationalism. Anything else is just muddying the waters and enabling the stigmatisation of actual patriots. Look at where the UK is, and where it is going. Look at the pictures of schools with literally a single White face sitting among a sea of blacks. It's fucking insane, and it's obviously a racial issue that requires racial politics. At least we're talking about a rational lawful non-violent approach to sorting out who should be allowed to claim Englishness. We're having a conversation. Steve Laws, for example, is not a terrorist: he is a brave patriot giving a voice to the native population of a land which wants to recover that land. In reality English people are basically lovely. We're softies. The rest of the world knows that though. If we start to get a serious program of remigration off the ground, yes the reduction in sheer numbers of racial aliens will be welcome in itself, but black families that didn't produce criminal rugrats, and haven't spent the past 40 years moaning about how racist the English are will probably find that White communities rally round them, put in a good word for them, and achieve a consensus about not deporting them. What needs to happen is a basic shift in the narrative, and in the psychology: the assumption and understanding should be that citizenship is genetic, and that any exception to that is a polite and kind gesture from our people, which we have the full moral and legal right to withhold if we feel that we're being treated as suckers. And that's what I have to say about that. ...And of course Happy New Year to everyone in Australia!!! 🥳🎉🪩 -A.Frog '25/'26 🐸👍🏻
20:47

This video is propaganda. It functioned to keep Sargon in beer money, and the population of the UK in denial about race. Like all good lies, it contains elements of truth, of which Sargon supplies massive helpings - far more than most propagandists ever dare - but it's effective... The first two minutes and 32 seconds are all true, by which time your brain trusts him, and you see him as being on your side as a White native Englishman. Of course right from the start he picks the easiest of targets (put a box of cornflakes next to a Guardian journalist and it will look like a patriot). And then (at 2:33) you get: "...but luckily for everyone else, being English is not just about being a race...". He continues: "...it's a particular way of viewing the world much as anything else", "...saying that I as an individual matter; every human matters". Of course Carl is not in any way wrong to identify and celebrate various English cultural artefacts as English, nor is he wrong to identify them as cultural, but the trick being done is to cut away their moorings from the DNA of the people who created them. You don't see him doing it, but he's in the water, scuba-diving down with a knife between his teeth, towards the tethers... ...And sure enough, at 5:19, in a mocking sneering smug tone: "But anyway Maya, let's get back to 'racial politics'. Let's not talk about values or ideas or ideals, or things that actually make the world a better place: let's get back to your fucking racial politics" (building to an angry exasperated tone). And suddenly there we are. 😐 The culture in which we were all being encouraged to take pride and admire now floats entirely free of its genetic substrate. Racial politics is bad, and associated in your brain with Guardian journalists. This - our - culture which the bodies and brains of our ancestors built, is now some sort of magic pink sparkly cloud hovering just above the ground, into which Indians and Africans can walk serenely and thereby be sort of transformed into us, nearly, just so long as it's done at a slow responsible pace. At 5:54 Sargon continues his imaginary conversation with Maya of The Guardian, adopting a super-confident and mildly exasperated lecturing tone (his favourite mode of address, obviously), and says: "But Maya, immigrants are not just a race; there are many hundreds of thousands of immigrants from France, and if you go to London, to an area which is predominantly populated by French people, it would not be sensible to say 'well this is an English area of London', is it, and yet that's nothing to do with their race, because they, like you will obviously point out, are White...". Well hang on Carl, yes, they are all White, and so maybe the thing making it (as you say) "not-sensible" to say they should not be in London doesn't become non-racial. Looks like you just talked yourself there in an illogical way. They are all White. Maybe this matters. Perhaps if we instead consider the prospect of adding the same number (many hundreds of thousands) of subsaharan Africans to London rather than Frenchmen, now it would be very sensible indeed to say they should not be there, whence the sensible - racial - criterion is plain to see. A full essay on the evolution of human nature in geographically isolated regions and the neurodiversity which emerged from that is beyond the scope of this tweet, but suffice to say White culture is what you get from White people, and African culture is what you get from African people. Europeans are White, and the relative closeness among European countries and cultures (compared to subsaharan Africans) by most metrics you might care about is not a coincidence, since heritable biological traits actually exist and actually matter, and they are not distributed evenly between different racial groups (see Fst distance), ergo race matters. Carl is a master of tugging at heartstrings, talking about these "past generations of blacks" who "admired English culture", and "wanted to be like us" etc.. Yes, no doubt many such individuals existed. They were always exceptional though, and we know they were exceptional, because if they weren't then Africa today would basically be similar to Yorkshire, just with nicer weather. And the problem for Carl is that Africa is obviously not like that, nor does any population of blacks anywhere in the world behave as a group like Europeans. I don't care particularly about John Cleese or what he says or where he goes, so the rest of the video is not terribly interesting, but just note at 6:48 Carl talks in approving terms of how "a small number of immigrants is OK", but "an overwhelming flood is pushing that principle too far". The problem with that is the number of non-Whites already in Britain was crazy-high in 2019 when Carl made this video, and our children were already well on track to becoming minorities in British schools without adding a single immigrant, even back then. Horrible racial conflict has been rife across the capital at least since the 90s, and it would be delusional to see the 1981 Brixton riots as anything but racial, ...and all this, and every sort of demographic vandalism besides, has come to pass PURELY because people who had advocated for racial politics in the 60s and 70s were successfully demonised by the media, just as Carl is doing in this video. The obvious foolishness of large numbers is like the obvious danger of lots of gunpowder compared to a small amount of gunpowder. It's not like the conflict magically goes away when the numbers are small. You just get White people lying to themselves and pushing discomfort down into their subconsciousness, and non-Whites sometimes (but by no means always) playing the game at first till their numbers become large enough. Pakistanis understood that cultural attitudes to child rape were different in our country, and so they assimilated by successfully hiding their child rape for about 20 or 30 years. Some White people even helped with that assimilation. The parts of our culture that Carl claims to want to promote (rule of law, freedom to criticise Islam, mutual respect, etc) is stuff that exists DESPITE the non-White population in the UK. It IS racial. And like of course it's racial. We are our DNA. Our culture was made by people, ...who were made by DNA. You can not make White people feel good - proudly talking up White culture - and then in the next breath sneer down your nose at those engaging in racial politics. It's a nasty (and given that Carl is not stupid, I have to suspect cynical) trick, the effect of which is to encourage a White audience to continue entertaining a suicidal and delusional belief in a tabula rasa model of human nature. His defenders will say "oh this is an old video, he's changed now...", and I am sure he is delighted that you believe so. Show me any example of him back-tracking on a single word of that though. I'll wait. I am writing this because I see what's happening to our population, and frankly anyone who isn't willing to recognise the need for racial politics is not your friend in this battle. If Carl has changed, then now would be a really great time to make that clear and come out on the side of Racial Nationalism. Anything else is just muddying the waters and enabling the stigmatisation of actual patriots. Look at where the UK is, and where it is going. Look at the pictures of schools with literally a single White face sitting among a sea of blacks. It's fucking insane, and it's obviously a racial issue that requires racial politics. At least we're talking about a rational lawful non-violent approach to sorting out who should be allowed to claim Englishness. We're having a conversation. Steve Laws, for example, is not a terrorist: he is a brave patriot giving a voice to the native population of a land which wants to recover that land. In reality English people are basically lovely. We're softies. The rest of the world knows that though. If we start to get a serious program of remigration off the ground, yes the reduction in sheer numbers of racial aliens will be welcome in itself, but black families that didn't produce criminal rugrats, and haven't spent the past 40 years moaning about how racist the English are will probably find that White communities rally round them, put in a good word for them, and achieve a consensus about not deporting them. What needs to happen is a basic shift in the narrative, and in the psychology: the assumption and understanding should be that citizenship is genetic, and that any exception to that is a polite and kind gesture from our people, which we have the full moral and legal right to withhold if we feel that we're being treated as suckers. And that's what I have to say about that. ...And of course Happy New Year to everyone in Australia!!! 🥳🎉🪩 -A.Frog '25/'26 🐸👍🏻

𝙰𝚌𝚌𝚎𝚙𝚝𝚊𝚋𝚕𝚎 𝙵𝚛𝚘𝚐

167,032 次观看 • 6 个月前

This episode is about a once-in-a-generation mind working on what may be the most important problem in history. It's based on the new book The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence by Sebastian Mallaby. (0:00) This is the most crazy, ferocious corporate battle that we've ever seen. (2:21) Intelligence is fundamental; it is the root of all else. (3:27) When Demis founded DeepMind almost every investor turned him away. (4:50) Demis is a missionary entrepreneur and out-of-the-box scientist who, through brilliance and extraordinary drive, emerges as the right person for a particular moment. (6:20) I sit at my desk at 2 a.m., and I feel like reality is staring at me, screaming at me, literally screaming at me, trying to tell me something if I could just listen hard enough. That's how I feel every day, so you can see why I'm trying to build AI. I've felt that since I was very young that there's a deep, deep mystery about what's going on here. (7:10) Demis, who blazed the trail followed by rivals, is decent and public-spirited and wants the best for humanity. He has ego; he is fearsomely competitive, but his goal is scientific enlightenment, not money or power. (9:49) Demis has an extraordinary level of determination, unlike pretty much anybody. Astonishing, incredible determination. That's his most defining characteristic: just unbelievable determination. He works, sleeps, eats, breathes the mission 24 hours a day to a degree that I haven't seen with other people. (10:48) There is no 50% mode in Demis. There is not even a 99% mode in Demis. There is only 100%. (14:39) The slightly warped way I took that was: how do you know you've done your best? The only way I could know is basically if I push myself to the point just before death, because that is literally when you have done your best. (19:07) When he signed up for a game he liked to feel that he could win. (20:44) He saw no reason not to start a company and so he did. (22:40) Demis on what losing feels like to him: It's like my soul is on fire. (25:34) Demis was an extreme case of an authentic entrepreneur, not a mercenary who starts with a desire to get rich from a startup then casts around for a plausible idea, but rather a missionary who feels compelled to work on a particular challenge then starts a company as a way of tackling it. (25:57) The good thing about missionaries is that they never quit. Even if they have to work around the clock and pay themselves nothing. They will keep obsessing about the problem. (26:08) Peter Thiel on Demis: “I always say that people aren't really entrepreneurs in the abstract, but there's maybe one great company that somebody has in them. It was Demis's destiny to build this one.” (26:30) "If you invent a breakthrough in artificial intelligence so machines can learn, that would be worth 10 Microsofts." — Bill Gates (32:09) We only wanted hardcore believers. We would go to conferences and tell people we are starting an AGI company. 80% of the people would roll their eyes at us, literally roll their eyes at us and turn around and walk away. We figured that this was a very efficient way to discover who we should be talking to. (32:50) Blessed are those who believed before there was any evidence. (34:17) The way Demis saw things, true general intelligence would make almost anything possible, surpassing the internet, the printing press, or even the industrial revolution in importance. (35:22) Elon had declared that humans needed to colonize Mars in case disaster struck Earth. Demis had countered that killer AI robots might be one such disaster, but that the AI could obviously follow humans to Mars if it wanted to. (36:25) Peter Thiel felt instinctively suspicious of a fellow chess player. A man who had spent his formative years mentally crushing opponents should be treated with caution, Thiel reckoned. (37:07) I'm talking about the biggest invention ever, and investors keep coming back to "Where's the widget?" and I'm like, "I'm going to revolutionize all widgets, so I can pick you a random widget if you want me to, but you obviously haven't got the point if you're asking me this." (37:42) He [Larry Page] was basically telling me, maybe you could build a company like Google, but it would take the best part of your career. If my real mission was to build AGI, then why don't I use all the resources that he's accumulated? I thought that was a pretty good argument. (38:50) Elon tries to buy DeepMind (42:33) Sam Altman emails Elon: "I've been thinking a lot about whether it's possible to stop humanity from developing AI. I think the answer is almost definitely not. If it's going to happen anyway, it seems like it would be good for someone other than Google to do it first." (43:18) If you have powerful people who are able to understand the impact of the technology, they're not just gonna sit on the sidelines. (44:08) Humans had not understood how little they had understood. (44:31) As Peter Thiel said of Demis, "Geniuses are seldom brilliant in a general way. They tend to be brilliantly suited to a particular mission." (46:50) Demis was far more original and far more of a contrarian than most of the self-identified contrarians of Silicon Valley. (48:11) When Demis solves something big, he doesn't pause to spend much time savoring the achievement. (48:49) You definitely can't crack a hard problem if the person leading the team thinks it's not possible. (54:05) This is my whole life's work. I have to do what's necessary. The mission is in me; it's infused in me. You can't separate it from me. (54:28) Demis's core theme is that money and power were not ends in themselves. They were a means to scientific knowledge.
54:39

This episode is about a once-in-a-generation mind working on what may be the most important problem in history. It's based on the new book The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence by Sebastian Mallaby. (0:00) This is the most crazy, ferocious corporate battle that we've ever seen. (2:21) Intelligence is fundamental; it is the root of all else. (3:27) When Demis founded DeepMind almost every investor turned him away. (4:50) Demis is a missionary entrepreneur and out-of-the-box scientist who, through brilliance and extraordinary drive, emerges as the right person for a particular moment. (6:20) I sit at my desk at 2 a.m., and I feel like reality is staring at me, screaming at me, literally screaming at me, trying to tell me something if I could just listen hard enough. That's how I feel every day, so you can see why I'm trying to build AI. I've felt that since I was very young that there's a deep, deep mystery about what's going on here. (7:10) Demis, who blazed the trail followed by rivals, is decent and public-spirited and wants the best for humanity. He has ego; he is fearsomely competitive, but his goal is scientific enlightenment, not money or power. (9:49) Demis has an extraordinary level of determination, unlike pretty much anybody. Astonishing, incredible determination. That's his most defining characteristic: just unbelievable determination. He works, sleeps, eats, breathes the mission 24 hours a day to a degree that I haven't seen with other people. (10:48) There is no 50% mode in Demis. There is not even a 99% mode in Demis. There is only 100%. (14:39) The slightly warped way I took that was: how do you know you've done your best? The only way I could know is basically if I push myself to the point just before death, because that is literally when you have done your best. (19:07) When he signed up for a game he liked to feel that he could win. (20:44) He saw no reason not to start a company and so he did. (22:40) Demis on what losing feels like to him: It's like my soul is on fire. (25:34) Demis was an extreme case of an authentic entrepreneur, not a mercenary who starts with a desire to get rich from a startup then casts around for a plausible idea, but rather a missionary who feels compelled to work on a particular challenge then starts a company as a way of tackling it. (25:57) The good thing about missionaries is that they never quit. Even if they have to work around the clock and pay themselves nothing. They will keep obsessing about the problem. (26:08) Peter Thiel on Demis: “I always say that people aren't really entrepreneurs in the abstract, but there's maybe one great company that somebody has in them. It was Demis's destiny to build this one.” (26:30) "If you invent a breakthrough in artificial intelligence so machines can learn, that would be worth 10 Microsofts." — Bill Gates (32:09) We only wanted hardcore believers. We would go to conferences and tell people we are starting an AGI company. 80% of the people would roll their eyes at us, literally roll their eyes at us and turn around and walk away. We figured that this was a very efficient way to discover who we should be talking to. (32:50) Blessed are those who believed before there was any evidence. (34:17) The way Demis saw things, true general intelligence would make almost anything possible, surpassing the internet, the printing press, or even the industrial revolution in importance. (35:22) Elon had declared that humans needed to colonize Mars in case disaster struck Earth. Demis had countered that killer AI robots might be one such disaster, but that the AI could obviously follow humans to Mars if it wanted to. (36:25) Peter Thiel felt instinctively suspicious of a fellow chess player. A man who had spent his formative years mentally crushing opponents should be treated with caution, Thiel reckoned. (37:07) I'm talking about the biggest invention ever, and investors keep coming back to "Where's the widget?" and I'm like, "I'm going to revolutionize all widgets, so I can pick you a random widget if you want me to, but you obviously haven't got the point if you're asking me this." (37:42) He [Larry Page] was basically telling me, maybe you could build a company like Google, but it would take the best part of your career. If my real mission was to build AGI, then why don't I use all the resources that he's accumulated? I thought that was a pretty good argument. (38:50) Elon tries to buy DeepMind (42:33) Sam Altman emails Elon: "I've been thinking a lot about whether it's possible to stop humanity from developing AI. I think the answer is almost definitely not. If it's going to happen anyway, it seems like it would be good for someone other than Google to do it first." (43:18) If you have powerful people who are able to understand the impact of the technology, they're not just gonna sit on the sidelines. (44:08) Humans had not understood how little they had understood. (44:31) As Peter Thiel said of Demis, "Geniuses are seldom brilliant in a general way. They tend to be brilliantly suited to a particular mission." (46:50) Demis was far more original and far more of a contrarian than most of the self-identified contrarians of Silicon Valley. (48:11) When Demis solves something big, he doesn't pause to spend much time savoring the achievement. (48:49) You definitely can't crack a hard problem if the person leading the team thinks it's not possible. (54:05) This is my whole life's work. I have to do what's necessary. The mission is in me; it's infused in me. You can't separate it from me. (54:28) Demis's core theme is that money and power were not ends in themselves. They were a means to scientific knowledge.

David Senra

255,708 次观看 • 3 个月前

Analyzing Episode 55. Season 2 aka The Violence of Alignment If I visualize CihAl's journey for this season, a spiral tightening its rings comes to mind. There's always one problem after another, spiking in intensity and reaction. And, the weight of it is reflected in both Alya's increasingly somber demeanor. But, here's the thing. In every new problem, there's an echo of the old one, which leaves one with an inevitable feeling of deja vu - for the audience and the characters. We'll get to why towards the end of this analysis. For now, on we go. We kick off epi 55 with Cihan being introduced to Meryem *cough* dishrag *cough* by Sadakat. And what follows is a breakdown of her story with Cihan listening. However, when Meryem recounted her past woes, I focused less on her words and more on Cihan's words and expression. And what follows is a masterclass in the difference between sympathy and empathy. Kudos to Ozan Akbaba for portraying the difference. I couldn't help but compare the situation to when Cihan is listening to Alya's account of her past. With Alya, Cihan leans forward, barely moving. He listens, but his face tends to reflect his own emotion and mirrors Alya's at times - in other words, he's living those events with her. When he talks, his voice drops lower, but more importantly, there's a gentle softness meant to soothe. With Meryem, Cihan's body language is a tad more detached. When he's leaning forward in the seat, his hands are extended in front of him, clasped together, creating space. Then he leans back, one arm extended on the table, the other on his thigh. Again, there's this feel of distance. His voice remains soft, but there's no tenderness. He's not trying to alleviate, rather he's simply listening. Don't get me wrong, it's not like the guy doesn't feel bad for her, because what she relates shouldn't be experienced by anyone. But empathy goes beyond sympathy. Empathy is when you hurt with the one who's hurting. And that difference, to me, is clear between the two scenes. Long story short, when he's heard what Meryem's gone through, he offers to help get her out of prison because he feels responsible in part for her misfortunes. He says it's his 'duty' to help her. Here's what's interesting: when Meryem says his kindness and heart haven't changed, he gets uncomfortable. And after that, he's the one to get up from the chair, signaling the end of the conversation. Like he wants to get out of there, because some part of him that's not stupidly male understands Meryem's still attached to him, but he has no interest in that whatsoever. His method of saying goodbye is a handshake, again, a testament to his aloofness. And when Meryem hugs him, his hands remain at their sides; the man could have been a pillar. So, while he speaks not of Alya, the one time he takes her name, he drives the message across that 'she's no one ordinary' and 'tread carefully'. Honestly, I don't think he wants to talk about Alya to Meryem. Not because Alya's not important, but because Alya is too important. The part of his life that Alya represents is his alone, and he's very possessive about sharing that with anyone. To him, Meryem is a past that exists, but one that he would erase if he had the choice, because it hurts Alya. And that's pretty much the whole feel of this conversation. He wants to help Meryem, but he also wants her gone because her presence is a source of discomfort to Alya. Speaking of discomforts, the next scene I want to talk about is when the massive turd, who happens to be Alya's ex-husband, goes to the hospital to threaten her some more. Seriously, this character is a step short of absolute psycho. He's incapable of true emotion, just like his mother. Anyway, when Alya is explaining why she hasn't moved out yet, the zombie's eyes zero in on her wedding band. And, of course, being who he is, he absolutely ignores the topic of Deniz, his own flesh and blood, and instead, wants the ring gone because it symbolizes Alya's love and attachment to Cihan. Thankfully, Cihan arrives in time to push away the zombie and to hear Alya proclaim that while Boran has the power to use her son and distance her from Cihan physically, he has no power over her heart and who reigns over it. Now, think back to that conversation where Deniz wants her to pick between Cihan and himself. And Cihan says Deniz's throne (or place) in her heart is so secure, he's happy to live in the shadow of that throne. While Alya smiles at Cihan's response, she also looks miserable later at the thought of not being able to tell Cihan that things aren't exactly so. However, I think she manages to get her point across in this scene without even realizing it. Because while she may make sacrifices for her son, no amount of blackmail, pain, or hurt can remove Cihan's love from her heart. Now, I don't know about you, but that sounds almost like an equal footing. The only difference is that she's bound to protect her son, because, unlike Cihan, he can't protect himself. And that's what leads Cihan to later tell Alya that her words are etched across his heart, and that he's never felt that loved by anyone. Curiously enough, this scene also brings the spotlight on two other details: Alya's 'anka' side and the wedding ring. Both of which will feature rather greatly, in the coming episodes, I think. Now, there's a rumor going around that Alya will take off her wedding ring. And, I don't know, the fact that Cihan's almost preening at Alya, still wearing the ring, and Alya saying 'I couldn't take it off' tells me that's not what's going to happen. For some reason, I'm beginning to get the vibes of a showdown of trust in the same vein as episode 27. Now you may argue that Cihan actually tells Alya about Mine's pregnancy in that episode, but CihAl have had a long journey since then. Alya has seen Cihan choose her over Boran with her own eyes. She's seen the lengths the man has gone to for her and Deniz. So, yes, she might be pissed about something or the other related to Meryem in future episodes, but her taking off the ring seems not within her character somehow. But hey, that's just me, and I could be wrong. Anyway, the final scene I want to talk about is, of course, the ending. Everyone kept focusing on why Cihan allowed Meryem to hold his hands, but I focused on his words. Because he very clearly tells Meryem that he's no longer in love with her, that he's moved on, and that she should not hang about in the hopes of that ever changing. In his own way, Cihan is quite ruthless here. He draws a line, but his words are designed not to hurt, because he's not an ahole. He just wants dishrag to understand that even the thought of Alya being hurt pains him more now than anything else. And, he's not very kind to people who try to hurt Alya. It's a disclosure and warning, but in the form of steel wrapped in satin. Now, let's go back to the beginning for a bit, where I mentioned spiraling events. See, I somehow thought that those vows Cihal took 'savaşta, bedelde, kararda, kaderde, aşkta' were linear levels. That they'd clear them one by one and get to love. But when you see the overall structure of their journey in this season, it's not linear at all. Because all those things have existed in one form or another since ep 29. There's always an element of all of these conditions in every episode. Which is why we keep thinking, wait a minute, we've been here before. But as I said, the spiral is tightening itself. With every episode, the stakes are raised higher, and CihAl are pushed a little bit closer to the edge. Almost like the deep breath before the plunge. And here’s where things get interesting. Because what feels like repetition is not actually stagnation, it’s confrontation deferred, coming back sharper each time. Every cycle brings them back to the same point. Their love deepens, fear follows, a decision is made in the name of protection, and that decision creates distance instead of resolution. Which brings me back to the vows - savaşta, bedelde, kararda, kaderde, aşkta. I was wrong to think of them as steps. They’re not something Cihan and Alya are moving towards; they’re something CihAl are already inside of. Every episode is them living those vows in real time. But with every new episode, the pressure mounts, like music builds to a crescendo. And yet, within all of that, aşk remains. Not as a reward at the end of the journey. But as the one thing that refuses to disappear, no matter how many times everything else goes wrong. And maybe that's why episode 55 feels the way it does. It creates the illusion that everything is falling apart, yet again, when in reality, everything is being forced into alignment. Something is moving all the pieces on the chessboard for an ultimate showdown. And the process gets more violent by the minute. Cihan hides the truth because he thinks love needs protection. Alya experiences that same act as distance, almost betrayal. Meanwhile, Boran and Sadakat keep pushing, and Meryem drops like a freaking bomb at the worst possible moment. Suddenly, everything that could have remained unsaid, unresolved, or postponed is dragged into the open. This has all the hallmarks of a breaking point. Note, I said breaking point, not breakdown. Because, unlike breakdowns, breaking points are used for revelations. I guess what I'm trying to say is things are headed towards alignment, not just for the overall story, but also CihAl's journey individually. Because Cihan and Alya also keep repeating their mistakes. Their growth requires something along the lines of a push, too. So, we have war, sacrifice, decisions, fate, and love, all coming to a head. And while there are plenty of reasons to feel ominous, I personally don't. The story is no longer about them loving each other - we're well past that. It’s about whether they can finally stand in that love openly and without any fear. Because everything is pushing them toward a breaking point, not to destroy them, I think, but to shape them into who they need to be. And if there’s one thing CihAl have proven since day one, it’s this - they don’t fall apart under pressure, they grow stronger, and they survive the impossible. #CihAl #UzakŞehir
2:51

Analyzing Episode 55. Season 2 aka The Violence of Alignment If I visualize CihAl's journey for this season, a spiral tightening its rings comes to mind. There's always one problem after another, spiking in intensity and reaction. And, the weight of it is reflected in both Alya's increasingly somber demeanor. But, here's the thing. In every new problem, there's an echo of the old one, which leaves one with an inevitable feeling of deja vu - for the audience and the characters. We'll get to why towards the end of this analysis. For now, on we go. We kick off epi 55 with Cihan being introduced to Meryem *cough* dishrag *cough* by Sadakat. And what follows is a breakdown of her story with Cihan listening. However, when Meryem recounted her past woes, I focused less on her words and more on Cihan's words and expression. And what follows is a masterclass in the difference between sympathy and empathy. Kudos to Ozan Akbaba for portraying the difference. I couldn't help but compare the situation to when Cihan is listening to Alya's account of her past. With Alya, Cihan leans forward, barely moving. He listens, but his face tends to reflect his own emotion and mirrors Alya's at times - in other words, he's living those events with her. When he talks, his voice drops lower, but more importantly, there's a gentle softness meant to soothe. With Meryem, Cihan's body language is a tad more detached. When he's leaning forward in the seat, his hands are extended in front of him, clasped together, creating space. Then he leans back, one arm extended on the table, the other on his thigh. Again, there's this feel of distance. His voice remains soft, but there's no tenderness. He's not trying to alleviate, rather he's simply listening. Don't get me wrong, it's not like the guy doesn't feel bad for her, because what she relates shouldn't be experienced by anyone. But empathy goes beyond sympathy. Empathy is when you hurt with the one who's hurting. And that difference, to me, is clear between the two scenes. Long story short, when he's heard what Meryem's gone through, he offers to help get her out of prison because he feels responsible in part for her misfortunes. He says it's his 'duty' to help her. Here's what's interesting: when Meryem says his kindness and heart haven't changed, he gets uncomfortable. And after that, he's the one to get up from the chair, signaling the end of the conversation. Like he wants to get out of there, because some part of him that's not stupidly male understands Meryem's still attached to him, but he has no interest in that whatsoever. His method of saying goodbye is a handshake, again, a testament to his aloofness. And when Meryem hugs him, his hands remain at their sides; the man could have been a pillar. So, while he speaks not of Alya, the one time he takes her name, he drives the message across that 'she's no one ordinary' and 'tread carefully'. Honestly, I don't think he wants to talk about Alya to Meryem. Not because Alya's not important, but because Alya is too important. The part of his life that Alya represents is his alone, and he's very possessive about sharing that with anyone. To him, Meryem is a past that exists, but one that he would erase if he had the choice, because it hurts Alya. And that's pretty much the whole feel of this conversation. He wants to help Meryem, but he also wants her gone because her presence is a source of discomfort to Alya. Speaking of discomforts, the next scene I want to talk about is when the massive turd, who happens to be Alya's ex-husband, goes to the hospital to threaten her some more. Seriously, this character is a step short of absolute psycho. He's incapable of true emotion, just like his mother. Anyway, when Alya is explaining why she hasn't moved out yet, the zombie's eyes zero in on her wedding band. And, of course, being who he is, he absolutely ignores the topic of Deniz, his own flesh and blood, and instead, wants the ring gone because it symbolizes Alya's love and attachment to Cihan. Thankfully, Cihan arrives in time to push away the zombie and to hear Alya proclaim that while Boran has the power to use her son and distance her from Cihan physically, he has no power over her heart and who reigns over it. Now, think back to that conversation where Deniz wants her to pick between Cihan and himself. And Cihan says Deniz's throne (or place) in her heart is so secure, he's happy to live in the shadow of that throne. While Alya smiles at Cihan's response, she also looks miserable later at the thought of not being able to tell Cihan that things aren't exactly so. However, I think she manages to get her point across in this scene without even realizing it. Because while she may make sacrifices for her son, no amount of blackmail, pain, or hurt can remove Cihan's love from her heart. Now, I don't know about you, but that sounds almost like an equal footing. The only difference is that she's bound to protect her son, because, unlike Cihan, he can't protect himself. And that's what leads Cihan to later tell Alya that her words are etched across his heart, and that he's never felt that loved by anyone. Curiously enough, this scene also brings the spotlight on two other details: Alya's 'anka' side and the wedding ring. Both of which will feature rather greatly, in the coming episodes, I think. Now, there's a rumor going around that Alya will take off her wedding ring. And, I don't know, the fact that Cihan's almost preening at Alya, still wearing the ring, and Alya saying 'I couldn't take it off' tells me that's not what's going to happen. For some reason, I'm beginning to get the vibes of a showdown of trust in the same vein as episode 27. Now you may argue that Cihan actually tells Alya about Mine's pregnancy in that episode, but CihAl have had a long journey since then. Alya has seen Cihan choose her over Boran with her own eyes. She's seen the lengths the man has gone to for her and Deniz. So, yes, she might be pissed about something or the other related to Meryem in future episodes, but her taking off the ring seems not within her character somehow. But hey, that's just me, and I could be wrong. Anyway, the final scene I want to talk about is, of course, the ending. Everyone kept focusing on why Cihan allowed Meryem to hold his hands, but I focused on his words. Because he very clearly tells Meryem that he's no longer in love with her, that he's moved on, and that she should not hang about in the hopes of that ever changing. In his own way, Cihan is quite ruthless here. He draws a line, but his words are designed not to hurt, because he's not an ahole. He just wants dishrag to understand that even the thought of Alya being hurt pains him more now than anything else. And, he's not very kind to people who try to hurt Alya. It's a disclosure and warning, but in the form of steel wrapped in satin. Now, let's go back to the beginning for a bit, where I mentioned spiraling events. See, I somehow thought that those vows Cihal took 'savaşta, bedelde, kararda, kaderde, aşkta' were linear levels. That they'd clear them one by one and get to love. But when you see the overall structure of their journey in this season, it's not linear at all. Because all those things have existed in one form or another since ep 29. There's always an element of all of these conditions in every episode. Which is why we keep thinking, wait a minute, we've been here before. But as I said, the spiral is tightening itself. With every episode, the stakes are raised higher, and CihAl are pushed a little bit closer to the edge. Almost like the deep breath before the plunge. And here’s where things get interesting. Because what feels like repetition is not actually stagnation, it’s confrontation deferred, coming back sharper each time. Every cycle brings them back to the same point. Their love deepens, fear follows, a decision is made in the name of protection, and that decision creates distance instead of resolution. Which brings me back to the vows - savaşta, bedelde, kararda, kaderde, aşkta. I was wrong to think of them as steps. They’re not something Cihan and Alya are moving towards; they’re something CihAl are already inside of. Every episode is them living those vows in real time. But with every new episode, the pressure mounts, like music builds to a crescendo. And yet, within all of that, aşk remains. Not as a reward at the end of the journey. But as the one thing that refuses to disappear, no matter how many times everything else goes wrong. And maybe that's why episode 55 feels the way it does. It creates the illusion that everything is falling apart, yet again, when in reality, everything is being forced into alignment. Something is moving all the pieces on the chessboard for an ultimate showdown. And the process gets more violent by the minute. Cihan hides the truth because he thinks love needs protection. Alya experiences that same act as distance, almost betrayal. Meanwhile, Boran and Sadakat keep pushing, and Meryem drops like a freaking bomb at the worst possible moment. Suddenly, everything that could have remained unsaid, unresolved, or postponed is dragged into the open. This has all the hallmarks of a breaking point. Note, I said breaking point, not breakdown. Because, unlike breakdowns, breaking points are used for revelations. I guess what I'm trying to say is things are headed towards alignment, not just for the overall story, but also CihAl's journey individually. Because Cihan and Alya also keep repeating their mistakes. Their growth requires something along the lines of a push, too. So, we have war, sacrifice, decisions, fate, and love, all coming to a head. And while there are plenty of reasons to feel ominous, I personally don't. The story is no longer about them loving each other - we're well past that. It’s about whether they can finally stand in that love openly and without any fear. Because everything is pushing them toward a breaking point, not to destroy them, I think, but to shape them into who they need to be. And if there’s one thing CihAl have proven since day one, it’s this - they don’t fall apart under pressure, they grow stronger, and they survive the impossible. #CihAl #UzakŞehir

CocoLoco

21,061 次观看 • 3 个月前

dave meltzer: youtube enthusiast 💀 perfect. now we can stop pretending this was ever complicated. the real story is not that wwe is afraid of aew. the real story is not that “high level wwe officials” are whispering scary things to dave meltzer. the real story is not even that tony khan got asked a planted question on a media call with very little distribution about the possibility of aew soon having very little distribution, although that sentence is so stupidly perfect it should be bronzed and placed outside the wrestling observer newsletter office like a war memorial for people who died pretending this was journalism. the real story is that aew is going to lose its wbd distribution deal. either it ends at the expiration of the three-year term in 2027, or it ends earlier if paramount closes wbd and decides aew has no strategic place inside the new company. and based on the board as it exists right now, the most likely landing spot for aew in 2027 is google / youtube. that is the story. everything else is laundering. tony khan wants the story to be: “why would wwe say this about us?” that is the whole operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a lightly viewed roh show. a planted story. a planted messenger. a rehearsed answer. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the exact thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is not. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. aew is heading toward youtube because the domestic media rights board is closing around them. not as a troll. not as a bit. not as “pr spin.” as a business conclusion. aew is not leverage. wwe is not afraid of aew. the $185 million number was bullshit. the buyer universe was shrinking. paramount / skydance was coming for wbd. wbd was not going to be some permanent aew safe house. youtube was only ever a real “option” if someone at google was actually cutting a media rights check and underwriting production. not because every divorced mom with a ring light and a gmail account can upload video to the same platform. that was always the distinction. that is still the distinction. Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2025 “YouTube is an option the same way you or I could start a YT channel tomorrow. Is Jon Cruz cutting AEW a media rights check or underwriting a production budget? Hell no. Just the reality. It isn’t the model. Jon is global head of sports over there.” that was february, not last week. not after dave meltzer suddenly discovered youtube prelim numbers like columbus finding the new world. it is becoming inevitable now. Nick LoPiccolo — April 30, 2026 — 11:26 AM — 251.2K Views “to every journalist and every podcast who interviews tony khan from this day forward: please ask tony if wbd told him back in august they would not be renewing aew. wbd told him in august. i confirmed it directly and triple sourced it. please ask why tony has been acting like nothing is wrong for the last 8 months, and then please ask tony what his actual distribution plan is. because the only distributor left that will take aew is google/youtube. the myaew app is not realistic. the my aewapp is a death sentence in 2026 if youtube doesn’t make an mg deal for aew. they started building it too late and there is no realistic way to scale it. also, who is going to sell ads for the platform? kiswe is not the best. they built the myaew app. they are new to the game. hold tony’s feet to the fire. Paramount is not real for aew. WBD passed back in August. CW/Roku is now off the table. Amazon and Fox do not want AEW. ask Tony why he's been lying to you and to the locker room and to the fans, acting like things are all great with the network? i am sure a lot of people would love to hear his answer.” april 30. 251.2k views. not whispered. not hidden. not vague. not “high level wwe officials.” i said it publicly and directly: wbd passed back in august. paramount is not real for aew. cw / roku is off the table. amazon and fox do not want aew. the myaew app is not realistic. google / youtube is the only distributor left on the board that makes sense. that is the actual story tony khan does not want to answer. not “why would wwe say this?” ask tony khan if wbd told him in august that wbd would not be renewing aew. ask what his actual distribution plan is. ask who is selling ads for the myaew app. ask how a platform built this late scales in 2026. ask whether youtube is an actual rights partner with an mg, or just the place you go when the real buyers are gone. that is the question. not the fake question dave meltzer laundered into “high level wwe officials.” the real question. Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 10:51 AM — 9,565 Views “No one in Hollywood believes the $185 million number.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 11:35 AM — 7,470 Views “The $185 million figure is inflated. Variety’s October 2, 2024 article was likely updated after a publicist called on AEW’s behalf, as early reports placed the deal between $140 and $150 million per year. Tony Khan was also included in Variety’s Dealmakers 2024 list, which, while not officially pay to play, strongly favors those spending significant advertising dollars with the outlet. No one in Hollywood seriously believes WBD, which is in junk bond status, is paying AEW $185 million per year. Clear enough?” clear enough? the number was never clean. the number was never real in the way aew fans and wrestling media pretended it was real. and when the $185 million number started getting laughed out of adult rooms, the number magically became $178 million. that is where the shell game gets funny. because $178 million was not some sacred sourced number either. it was brandon thurston taking the median between $170 million, reported by sports business journal, and $185 million, reported by variety and others. that is literally what wrestlenomics said. Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “Why use $178 million here for AEW’s new deal when some outlets are reporting the average annual value is $185 million?” Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “I used $178 million here because it is simply the median of $170 million, as reported by Sports Business Journal, and $185 million, reported by Variety and others.” there it is. arithmetic. not an all-cash rights fee. not a clean license number. not proof wbd valued aew like raw. not a finance-department document from warner bros. discovery. a midpoint between conflicting public reports. then wrestling media treated that midpoint like scripture because they needed the story to be “aew is valued like raw,” not “aew pr inflated a number no serious person in hollywood believed.” and by the way, $170 million was not the clean all-cash number either. that is the scam. float the number. repeat the number. launder the number. defend the number with people who do not understand the difference between cash rights fees, in-kind services, equity, marketing commitments, platform value, make-goods, ad inventory, and press release math. then when the number collapses, pretend the next number was always the number. that is not reporting. that is aew state news. Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 5:53 AM — 12.6K Views “AEW isn’t leverage. It’s not competition. It’s a niche product with loud fans and limited reach.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 8:56 AM — 1,018 Views “We handle wrestling deals too, but thinking we need AEW for leverage is myopic. The landscape is changing and the game I’m playing is different.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 15, 2025 — 25.7K Views “AEW isn’t leverage.” that was never emotional. that was never tribal. that was never “i hate aew.” it was market structure. wwe did not need aew as leverage because real leverage was never “another wrestling show exists.” real leverage is architecture, scale, subscriber churn, platform strategy, sports adjacency, global rights, advertising, sponsorship, live inventory, library value, data, brand safety, executive relationships, and the actual buyer universe of maybe 18-20 companies in the united states that matter for live sports rights. aew fans thought this was a wrestling argument. it was never a wrestling argument. it was a board. and the board was already moving. Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 482 Views “I wasn’t viewing the above in that context (TKO vs AEW counter programming), it was more of this is what I’m hearing after 2 weeks of big media deals rolling out (Skydance closing, South Park library moving) etc. Which have all been in the works for awhile.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 388 Views “But if you were to look at it from a counter programming perspective (and I don’t think this was a factor in UFC deal) - there are only so many players for these big media rights deals. PARA is likely off the board (via TKO deal) & then what if they acquire WB in 2026/27?” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 535 Views “Yes, of course, that wouldn’t mean the end for AEW. It would make navigating their media rights deal more challenging, I would guess. But this is a hypothetical scenario & I do not believe anyone is paying $7.7b for UFC or a $40b valuation for WB w/ how do we fuck AEW, either.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 “And hearing all weekend Paramount is still interested in WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 1.3K Views “I think more interesting for what it could mean as the dominoes keep falling in terms of the still evolving landscape. The deals are massive & the number of major players at the top are shrinking as still big push for consolidation & scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 12:11 PM — 2,588 Views “And I’d view AAA on Google/YouTube as directly competitive. It targets both the CMLL collab & the audience that used to watch AEW Dark on YouTube, & WWE is able to send well known stars to AAA events with an eye towards converting more of the younger, YouTube demo of viewers who don’t watch streamers.” again: august 11. not yesterday. not after dave meltzer tweeted a netflix prelim number. not after anyone had to retrofit the argument. the point was already there: the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, paramount was likely off the board for aew because of the tko deal, google / youtube was becoming directly competitive for the exact audience aew used to reach through dark, and the buyer universe was consolidating around deals much bigger than tony khan’s feelings. this was not mysticism. this was not inside baseball for the sake of sounding smart. this was the board. Nick LoPiccolo — August 24, 2025 “This isn’t fair. I misread your question. AEW will exist but likely on the Discovery Global app (if it ever launches, I would bet that it doesn’t) and it will continue to do consistent ratings. If Paramount/Skydance buys WBD in a year…” Nick LoPiccolo — September 4, 2025 — 76 Views “No, that’s the WBD network division (cable, news, sports) that was already announced as being spun off under Discovery Global. The article you’re citing is about them selling a minority equity stake in that unit to cut debt and boost valuation ahead of the 2026 split.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 3.6K Views “This is not just about Hollywood scale. It is the foundation of a conservative aligned media infrastructure. A Paramount/WBD merger would fold CBS, CNN, HBO, and Warner Bros IP into Ellison’s orbit under Trump’s regulatory umbrella.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 11K Views “Within 48 hours of the rumor, WBD stock surged ~55% and Paramount Skydance rose ~24%. That market response itself boxed David Zaslav in; his board, Wall Street, and his own contract now expect movement.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 27, 2025 — 12:16 PM — 3,516 Views “Nah homie. Enjoy watching the show on YouTube after Ellison buys WBD and Ari who is advising Ellison and used to represent Trump and runs TKO makes the call.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 28, 2025 — 174 Views “I believe if and when Paramount acquires WBD, TKO will push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. The long knives are already out for competitors, and the rights deals have likely been spread around town precisely to keep rivals from signing with those streamers.” none of that was random. paramount / skydance, ellison, ari, tko, wbd linear assets, youtube, aaa, the tko deal, the wbd split, the shrinking rights buyer universe — all of it was one connected domestic rights architecture. that is why this conversation was always over the heads of the people screaming “cope” in my replies. they were arguing like fans. i was reading the cap table. Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Yes, I always believed Paramount would walk away with WBD. I was one of the first to talk about it on here, even if I wasn’t the first to hear it. The Paramount Skydance acquisition closed on August 7. I posted this on August 11, about 1 month before the The Wall Street Journal first broke the news on September 12 that Paramount Skydance was preparing a bid for WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “The bid was always going to be hostile. We are only in this process because it was a hostile bid. Most people in Hollywood believed Ellison long coveted WB and Jack Warner’s chair. WB was not for sale when Skydance acquired Paramount, which is much smaller in scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Nearly everyone in town assumed an Ellison acquisition of WBD was inevitable until the Netflix bid shocked everyone. Signs were there for the last two weeks, which is also when I stopped posting about what might happen. Of course, its not over yet. Paramount still has paths to winning this acquisition. The one thing that’s for certain though is an Ellison-led acquisition of WBD is no longer inevitable.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 8, 2025 “END CREDITS” space jam is a warner bros. movie. that was the joke. and the joke was the same thing i had been saying the whole time: paramount was winning the bid, for those who did not understand. Nick LoPiccolo — December 19, 2025 — 4:30 PM — 828 Views “Here is another reference to it. So tell me how exactly is Paramount the better outcome for Dave’s argument? Netflix doesn’t touch the WBD linear assets. Gunnar keeps his SpinCo.” Puck excerpt — December 19, 2025 “Many industry insiders are also skeptical about Paramount’s seven-year, $7.7 billion deal for exclusive UFC rights in the U.S. Yes, it can be read as a signal that Ellison came to play. But some people see it more as Ari Emanuel having his way with the person to whom he is ostensibly an (unpaid) advisor…” that is the board. that is the relationship map. that is the thing wrestling media either does not understand or pretends not to understand, because understanding it means admitting the story is not “aew has leverage.” the story is that aew is sitting in the middle of a consolidating rights marketplace where the people with leverage are doing much bigger things than worrying about tony khan’s feelings. Nick LoPiccolo — January 21, 2026 — 4:22 PM — 870 Views “i mean get ready to learn youtube buddy” Nick LoPiccolo — February 19, 2026 — 2.8K Views “Paramount was always my bet to acquire Warner Bros. Never wavered.” Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2026 — 1:27 PM — 118 Views “you don’t need to look under a hood I AM SAYING THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 I BEEN SAYING IT SINCE JULY / AUGUST 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 PARAMOUNT IS COMING FOR WBD AEW WILL LOSE A TV DEAL 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 GUESS WHO WAS RIGHT 💀” so no, this is not hindsight. this is not showing up after the fact with a flashlight and pretending i discovered the body. this is a paper trail. february: youtube is not a real rights model unless google is cutting the check. april: wbd passed back in august, the myaew app is not realistic, paramount is not real for aew, cw / roku is off the table, amazon and fox do not want aew, and google / youtube is the only distributor left that makes sense. july: the $185 million number is inflated and aew is not leverage. august: the buyer board is shrinking, paramount is still interested in wbd, and google / youtube becomes directly competitive. september: paramount / wbd folds the board into ellison’s orbit, and if ellison buys wbd, enjoy youtube. december: paramount was always the bet, the bid was always going to be hostile, and netflix does not solve dave meltzer’s argument because netflix does not touch the linear assets. january: get ready to learn youtube. february: paramount is coming for wbd and aew will lose a tv deal. same board. same thesis. same answer. now here is the part tony khan and dave meltzer do not want to say out loud. tony khan and dave meltzer do not mention me publicly for a reason. because the second they say my name out loud, they admit where this conversation has actually been coming from. not wwe. not some anonymous “high level official.” not some shadowy tko whisper campaign. me. that is the problem for them. behind the scenes, ask any real insider what happens when my name comes up around this subject. there is a reaction. not because i’m magic. not because i’m some internet boogeyman. because they know exactly who is saying it, why i’m saying it, what rooms i have been in, what companies i have dealt with, what executives i have spoken to, and why the analysis keeps landing. that is why they keep trying to non-person me publicly while reacting to me privately. they want the argument. they want the benefit of responding to the argument. they just do not want to admit whose argument it is. when i said wbd told aew back in august 2025 they were not exercising the option for the fourth year, tony khan blew up behind the scenes and forced john mcmullen to revise / update his article 2-3 weeks ago after i tweeted it. which is hilarious because that should not even be crazy or damaging “news.” that is how this business works. when a distributor is not continuing, they tell you early enough so you have time to find a new home. that is not sabotage. that is not wwe. that is not nick lopiccolo hiding inside david zaslav’s air vents with a clipboard. that is corporate courtesy. wbd execs privately whisper and shake their heads at tony khan’s behavior because their view is very simple: why does tony khan act like everything is great and rainbows and sunshine with the studio? we told tony khan as a courtesy so tony khan would have time to find a new home. and no, this has zero to do with paramount looming as an excuse. paramount did not even make its first hostile bid for wbd until september 11 or 12. that was after tony khan was already told there would not be a wbd renewal. so what did tony khan do? tony khan turned the truth into a wrestling angle. tony khan, or one of tony khan’s minions, gets dave meltzer to drop a story assigning my claims and what i have been publicly posting about tony khan to “high level wwe officials.” why? because it gives tony khan a safer enemy. tony khan does not want the story to be the actual timeline. because the actual timeline is brutal. on february 28, i said youtube was not a real media rights model unless google was actually cutting the check and underwriting production. on april 30, i said wbd passed in august, the myaew app was not realistic, paramount was not real for aew, cw / roku was off the table, amazon and fox did not want aew, and the only distributor left that made sense was google / youtube. on july 9, i said no one in hollywood believed the $185 million number. on july 10, i said aew was not leverage. on august 11, i said the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, and google / youtube was becoming a directly competitive lane. on september 16, i said a paramount / wbd merger would fold cbs, cnn, hbo, and warner bros. ip into ellison’s orbit. on september 27, i said enjoy the show on youtube after ellison buys wbd. on september 28, i said if paramount acquires wbd, tko would push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. on december 6, i said paramount skydance was preparing a bid for wbd long before most people admitted the obvious. on february 19, i said paramount was always my bet to acquire warner bros. and on february 28, i said it in all caps: paramount is coming for wbd. aew will lose a tv deal. that is the part tony khan cannot answer directly, because the direct answer means admitting this was never “wwe is scared of us.” it was always the board closing. tony khan wants the story to be: why would wwe say this about us? that is the laundering operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a show with very little distribution answering a canned question about aew potentially having very little distribution. based on a planted story, from a planted messenger, with a rehearsed answer, after an roh show maybe 8-15k people watched. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the very thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. a canned and rehearsed answer at an roh media scrum about a planted dave meltzer story based on my very real and very public analysis of the media rights board. but make no mistake. tony khan was responding to my words. tony khan just laundered them through dave meltzer and assigned them to wwe / tko so tony khan could keep lying about it publicly without ever saying my name. and now, voila. dave meltzer is posting about youtube viewers and prelims. Dave Meltzer — May 16, 2026 “At this moment there are 340,000 people watching prelims for Netflix on YouTube. It’s a good number.” yes, dave meltzer. youtube can have good numbers. nobody said youtube cannot have good numbers. that was never the issue. the issue is whether youtube is being used as a funnel into a premium rights ecosystem or as a substitute because the premium rights ecosystem rejected you. that is the difference. that has always been the difference. netflix using youtube prelims as audience acquisition is not the same thing as aew trying to spin youtube as a media rights home because the real buyers are gone. ufc using youtube as a funnel is not the same thing as aew using youtube as a life raft. wwe sending stars to aaa on youtube to convert a younger demo is not the same thing as aew retreating to youtube after the traditional buyer board closes. and the fact that dave meltzer is now suddenly tweeting like the mayor of youtube is the punchline. because the same people who mocked the youtube outcome are now going to spend the next several months explaining why youtube is actually good. of course it can be good. for the right use case. for the right property. inside the right architecture. with the right check attached. but when you spend two years telling everyone you were valued like raw and your next stop is “please subscribe and smash that bell,” maybe stop pretending this is victory formation? i told y’all where this was going. the record is right there. i’m still right. and tony and dave: you guys are see through translucent. that’s it for ye 🎤🎤🎤
0:20

dave meltzer: youtube enthusiast 💀 perfect. now we can stop pretending this was ever complicated. the real story is not that wwe is afraid of aew. the real story is not that “high level wwe officials” are whispering scary things to dave meltzer. the real story is not even that tony khan got asked a planted question on a media call with very little distribution about the possibility of aew soon having very little distribution, although that sentence is so stupidly perfect it should be bronzed and placed outside the wrestling observer newsletter office like a war memorial for people who died pretending this was journalism. the real story is that aew is going to lose its wbd distribution deal. either it ends at the expiration of the three-year term in 2027, or it ends earlier if paramount closes wbd and decides aew has no strategic place inside the new company. and based on the board as it exists right now, the most likely landing spot for aew in 2027 is google / youtube. that is the story. everything else is laundering. tony khan wants the story to be: “why would wwe say this about us?” that is the whole operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a lightly viewed roh show. a planted story. a planted messenger. a rehearsed answer. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the exact thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is not. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. aew is heading toward youtube because the domestic media rights board is closing around them. not as a troll. not as a bit. not as “pr spin.” as a business conclusion. aew is not leverage. wwe is not afraid of aew. the $185 million number was bullshit. the buyer universe was shrinking. paramount / skydance was coming for wbd. wbd was not going to be some permanent aew safe house. youtube was only ever a real “option” if someone at google was actually cutting a media rights check and underwriting production. not because every divorced mom with a ring light and a gmail account can upload video to the same platform. that was always the distinction. that is still the distinction. Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2025 “YouTube is an option the same way you or I could start a YT channel tomorrow. Is Jon Cruz cutting AEW a media rights check or underwriting a production budget? Hell no. Just the reality. It isn’t the model. Jon is global head of sports over there.” that was february, not last week. not after dave meltzer suddenly discovered youtube prelim numbers like columbus finding the new world. it is becoming inevitable now. Nick LoPiccolo — April 30, 2026 — 11:26 AM — 251.2K Views “to every journalist and every podcast who interviews tony khan from this day forward: please ask tony if wbd told him back in august they would not be renewing aew. wbd told him in august. i confirmed it directly and triple sourced it. please ask why tony has been acting like nothing is wrong for the last 8 months, and then please ask tony what his actual distribution plan is. because the only distributor left that will take aew is google/youtube. the myaew app is not realistic. the my aewapp is a death sentence in 2026 if youtube doesn’t make an mg deal for aew. they started building it too late and there is no realistic way to scale it. also, who is going to sell ads for the platform? kiswe is not the best. they built the myaew app. they are new to the game. hold tony’s feet to the fire. Paramount is not real for aew. WBD passed back in August. CW/Roku is now off the table. Amazon and Fox do not want AEW. ask Tony why he's been lying to you and to the locker room and to the fans, acting like things are all great with the network? i am sure a lot of people would love to hear his answer.” april 30. 251.2k views. not whispered. not hidden. not vague. not “high level wwe officials.” i said it publicly and directly: wbd passed back in august. paramount is not real for aew. cw / roku is off the table. amazon and fox do not want aew. the myaew app is not realistic. google / youtube is the only distributor left on the board that makes sense. that is the actual story tony khan does not want to answer. not “why would wwe say this?” ask tony khan if wbd told him in august that wbd would not be renewing aew. ask what his actual distribution plan is. ask who is selling ads for the myaew app. ask how a platform built this late scales in 2026. ask whether youtube is an actual rights partner with an mg, or just the place you go when the real buyers are gone. that is the question. not the fake question dave meltzer laundered into “high level wwe officials.” the real question. Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 10:51 AM — 9,565 Views “No one in Hollywood believes the $185 million number.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 11:35 AM — 7,470 Views “The $185 million figure is inflated. Variety’s October 2, 2024 article was likely updated after a publicist called on AEW’s behalf, as early reports placed the deal between $140 and $150 million per year. Tony Khan was also included in Variety’s Dealmakers 2024 list, which, while not officially pay to play, strongly favors those spending significant advertising dollars with the outlet. No one in Hollywood seriously believes WBD, which is in junk bond status, is paying AEW $185 million per year. Clear enough?” clear enough? the number was never clean. the number was never real in the way aew fans and wrestling media pretended it was real. and when the $185 million number started getting laughed out of adult rooms, the number magically became $178 million. that is where the shell game gets funny. because $178 million was not some sacred sourced number either. it was brandon thurston taking the median between $170 million, reported by sports business journal, and $185 million, reported by variety and others. that is literally what wrestlenomics said. Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “Why use $178 million here for AEW’s new deal when some outlets are reporting the average annual value is $185 million?” Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “I used $178 million here because it is simply the median of $170 million, as reported by Sports Business Journal, and $185 million, reported by Variety and others.” there it is. arithmetic. not an all-cash rights fee. not a clean license number. not proof wbd valued aew like raw. not a finance-department document from warner bros. discovery. a midpoint between conflicting public reports. then wrestling media treated that midpoint like scripture because they needed the story to be “aew is valued like raw,” not “aew pr inflated a number no serious person in hollywood believed.” and by the way, $170 million was not the clean all-cash number either. that is the scam. float the number. repeat the number. launder the number. defend the number with people who do not understand the difference between cash rights fees, in-kind services, equity, marketing commitments, platform value, make-goods, ad inventory, and press release math. then when the number collapses, pretend the next number was always the number. that is not reporting. that is aew state news. Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 5:53 AM — 12.6K Views “AEW isn’t leverage. It’s not competition. It’s a niche product with loud fans and limited reach.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 8:56 AM — 1,018 Views “We handle wrestling deals too, but thinking we need AEW for leverage is myopic. The landscape is changing and the game I’m playing is different.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 15, 2025 — 25.7K Views “AEW isn’t leverage.” that was never emotional. that was never tribal. that was never “i hate aew.” it was market structure. wwe did not need aew as leverage because real leverage was never “another wrestling show exists.” real leverage is architecture, scale, subscriber churn, platform strategy, sports adjacency, global rights, advertising, sponsorship, live inventory, library value, data, brand safety, executive relationships, and the actual buyer universe of maybe 18-20 companies in the united states that matter for live sports rights. aew fans thought this was a wrestling argument. it was never a wrestling argument. it was a board. and the board was already moving. Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 482 Views “I wasn’t viewing the above in that context (TKO vs AEW counter programming), it was more of this is what I’m hearing after 2 weeks of big media deals rolling out (Skydance closing, South Park library moving) etc. Which have all been in the works for awhile.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 388 Views “But if you were to look at it from a counter programming perspective (and I don’t think this was a factor in UFC deal) - there are only so many players for these big media rights deals. PARA is likely off the board (via TKO deal) & then what if they acquire WB in 2026/27?” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 535 Views “Yes, of course, that wouldn’t mean the end for AEW. It would make navigating their media rights deal more challenging, I would guess. But this is a hypothetical scenario & I do not believe anyone is paying $7.7b for UFC or a $40b valuation for WB w/ how do we fuck AEW, either.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 “And hearing all weekend Paramount is still interested in WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 1.3K Views “I think more interesting for what it could mean as the dominoes keep falling in terms of the still evolving landscape. The deals are massive & the number of major players at the top are shrinking as still big push for consolidation & scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 12:11 PM — 2,588 Views “And I’d view AAA on Google/YouTube as directly competitive. It targets both the CMLL collab & the audience that used to watch AEW Dark on YouTube, & WWE is able to send well known stars to AAA events with an eye towards converting more of the younger, YouTube demo of viewers who don’t watch streamers.” again: august 11. not yesterday. not after dave meltzer tweeted a netflix prelim number. not after anyone had to retrofit the argument. the point was already there: the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, paramount was likely off the board for aew because of the tko deal, google / youtube was becoming directly competitive for the exact audience aew used to reach through dark, and the buyer universe was consolidating around deals much bigger than tony khan’s feelings. this was not mysticism. this was not inside baseball for the sake of sounding smart. this was the board. Nick LoPiccolo — August 24, 2025 “This isn’t fair. I misread your question. AEW will exist but likely on the Discovery Global app (if it ever launches, I would bet that it doesn’t) and it will continue to do consistent ratings. If Paramount/Skydance buys WBD in a year…” Nick LoPiccolo — September 4, 2025 — 76 Views “No, that’s the WBD network division (cable, news, sports) that was already announced as being spun off under Discovery Global. The article you’re citing is about them selling a minority equity stake in that unit to cut debt and boost valuation ahead of the 2026 split.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 3.6K Views “This is not just about Hollywood scale. It is the foundation of a conservative aligned media infrastructure. A Paramount/WBD merger would fold CBS, CNN, HBO, and Warner Bros IP into Ellison’s orbit under Trump’s regulatory umbrella.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 11K Views “Within 48 hours of the rumor, WBD stock surged ~55% and Paramount Skydance rose ~24%. That market response itself boxed David Zaslav in; his board, Wall Street, and his own contract now expect movement.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 27, 2025 — 12:16 PM — 3,516 Views “Nah homie. Enjoy watching the show on YouTube after Ellison buys WBD and Ari who is advising Ellison and used to represent Trump and runs TKO makes the call.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 28, 2025 — 174 Views “I believe if and when Paramount acquires WBD, TKO will push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. The long knives are already out for competitors, and the rights deals have likely been spread around town precisely to keep rivals from signing with those streamers.” none of that was random. paramount / skydance, ellison, ari, tko, wbd linear assets, youtube, aaa, the tko deal, the wbd split, the shrinking rights buyer universe — all of it was one connected domestic rights architecture. that is why this conversation was always over the heads of the people screaming “cope” in my replies. they were arguing like fans. i was reading the cap table. Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Yes, I always believed Paramount would walk away with WBD. I was one of the first to talk about it on here, even if I wasn’t the first to hear it. The Paramount Skydance acquisition closed on August 7. I posted this on August 11, about 1 month before the The Wall Street Journal first broke the news on September 12 that Paramount Skydance was preparing a bid for WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “The bid was always going to be hostile. We are only in this process because it was a hostile bid. Most people in Hollywood believed Ellison long coveted WB and Jack Warner’s chair. WB was not for sale when Skydance acquired Paramount, which is much smaller in scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Nearly everyone in town assumed an Ellison acquisition of WBD was inevitable until the Netflix bid shocked everyone. Signs were there for the last two weeks, which is also when I stopped posting about what might happen. Of course, its not over yet. Paramount still has paths to winning this acquisition. The one thing that’s for certain though is an Ellison-led acquisition of WBD is no longer inevitable.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 8, 2025 “END CREDITS” space jam is a warner bros. movie. that was the joke. and the joke was the same thing i had been saying the whole time: paramount was winning the bid, for those who did not understand. Nick LoPiccolo — December 19, 2025 — 4:30 PM — 828 Views “Here is another reference to it. So tell me how exactly is Paramount the better outcome for Dave’s argument? Netflix doesn’t touch the WBD linear assets. Gunnar keeps his SpinCo.” Puck excerpt — December 19, 2025 “Many industry insiders are also skeptical about Paramount’s seven-year, $7.7 billion deal for exclusive UFC rights in the U.S. Yes, it can be read as a signal that Ellison came to play. But some people see it more as Ari Emanuel having his way with the person to whom he is ostensibly an (unpaid) advisor…” that is the board. that is the relationship map. that is the thing wrestling media either does not understand or pretends not to understand, because understanding it means admitting the story is not “aew has leverage.” the story is that aew is sitting in the middle of a consolidating rights marketplace where the people with leverage are doing much bigger things than worrying about tony khan’s feelings. Nick LoPiccolo — January 21, 2026 — 4:22 PM — 870 Views “i mean get ready to learn youtube buddy” Nick LoPiccolo — February 19, 2026 — 2.8K Views “Paramount was always my bet to acquire Warner Bros. Never wavered.” Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2026 — 1:27 PM — 118 Views “you don’t need to look under a hood I AM SAYING THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 I BEEN SAYING IT SINCE JULY / AUGUST 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 PARAMOUNT IS COMING FOR WBD AEW WILL LOSE A TV DEAL 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 GUESS WHO WAS RIGHT 💀” so no, this is not hindsight. this is not showing up after the fact with a flashlight and pretending i discovered the body. this is a paper trail. february: youtube is not a real rights model unless google is cutting the check. april: wbd passed back in august, the myaew app is not realistic, paramount is not real for aew, cw / roku is off the table, amazon and fox do not want aew, and google / youtube is the only distributor left that makes sense. july: the $185 million number is inflated and aew is not leverage. august: the buyer board is shrinking, paramount is still interested in wbd, and google / youtube becomes directly competitive. september: paramount / wbd folds the board into ellison’s orbit, and if ellison buys wbd, enjoy youtube. december: paramount was always the bet, the bid was always going to be hostile, and netflix does not solve dave meltzer’s argument because netflix does not touch the linear assets. january: get ready to learn youtube. february: paramount is coming for wbd and aew will lose a tv deal. same board. same thesis. same answer. now here is the part tony khan and dave meltzer do not want to say out loud. tony khan and dave meltzer do not mention me publicly for a reason. because the second they say my name out loud, they admit where this conversation has actually been coming from. not wwe. not some anonymous “high level official.” not some shadowy tko whisper campaign. me. that is the problem for them. behind the scenes, ask any real insider what happens when my name comes up around this subject. there is a reaction. not because i’m magic. not because i’m some internet boogeyman. because they know exactly who is saying it, why i’m saying it, what rooms i have been in, what companies i have dealt with, what executives i have spoken to, and why the analysis keeps landing. that is why they keep trying to non-person me publicly while reacting to me privately. they want the argument. they want the benefit of responding to the argument. they just do not want to admit whose argument it is. when i said wbd told aew back in august 2025 they were not exercising the option for the fourth year, tony khan blew up behind the scenes and forced john mcmullen to revise / update his article 2-3 weeks ago after i tweeted it. which is hilarious because that should not even be crazy or damaging “news.” that is how this business works. when a distributor is not continuing, they tell you early enough so you have time to find a new home. that is not sabotage. that is not wwe. that is not nick lopiccolo hiding inside david zaslav’s air vents with a clipboard. that is corporate courtesy. wbd execs privately whisper and shake their heads at tony khan’s behavior because their view is very simple: why does tony khan act like everything is great and rainbows and sunshine with the studio? we told tony khan as a courtesy so tony khan would have time to find a new home. and no, this has zero to do with paramount looming as an excuse. paramount did not even make its first hostile bid for wbd until september 11 or 12. that was after tony khan was already told there would not be a wbd renewal. so what did tony khan do? tony khan turned the truth into a wrestling angle. tony khan, or one of tony khan’s minions, gets dave meltzer to drop a story assigning my claims and what i have been publicly posting about tony khan to “high level wwe officials.” why? because it gives tony khan a safer enemy. tony khan does not want the story to be the actual timeline. because the actual timeline is brutal. on february 28, i said youtube was not a real media rights model unless google was actually cutting the check and underwriting production. on april 30, i said wbd passed in august, the myaew app was not realistic, paramount was not real for aew, cw / roku was off the table, amazon and fox did not want aew, and the only distributor left that made sense was google / youtube. on july 9, i said no one in hollywood believed the $185 million number. on july 10, i said aew was not leverage. on august 11, i said the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, and google / youtube was becoming a directly competitive lane. on september 16, i said a paramount / wbd merger would fold cbs, cnn, hbo, and warner bros. ip into ellison’s orbit. on september 27, i said enjoy the show on youtube after ellison buys wbd. on september 28, i said if paramount acquires wbd, tko would push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. on december 6, i said paramount skydance was preparing a bid for wbd long before most people admitted the obvious. on february 19, i said paramount was always my bet to acquire warner bros. and on february 28, i said it in all caps: paramount is coming for wbd. aew will lose a tv deal. that is the part tony khan cannot answer directly, because the direct answer means admitting this was never “wwe is scared of us.” it was always the board closing. tony khan wants the story to be: why would wwe say this about us? that is the laundering operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a show with very little distribution answering a canned question about aew potentially having very little distribution. based on a planted story, from a planted messenger, with a rehearsed answer, after an roh show maybe 8-15k people watched. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the very thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. a canned and rehearsed answer at an roh media scrum about a planted dave meltzer story based on my very real and very public analysis of the media rights board. but make no mistake. tony khan was responding to my words. tony khan just laundered them through dave meltzer and assigned them to wwe / tko so tony khan could keep lying about it publicly without ever saying my name. and now, voila. dave meltzer is posting about youtube viewers and prelims. Dave Meltzer — May 16, 2026 “At this moment there are 340,000 people watching prelims for Netflix on YouTube. It’s a good number.” yes, dave meltzer. youtube can have good numbers. nobody said youtube cannot have good numbers. that was never the issue. the issue is whether youtube is being used as a funnel into a premium rights ecosystem or as a substitute because the premium rights ecosystem rejected you. that is the difference. that has always been the difference. netflix using youtube prelims as audience acquisition is not the same thing as aew trying to spin youtube as a media rights home because the real buyers are gone. ufc using youtube as a funnel is not the same thing as aew using youtube as a life raft. wwe sending stars to aaa on youtube to convert a younger demo is not the same thing as aew retreating to youtube after the traditional buyer board closes. and the fact that dave meltzer is now suddenly tweeting like the mayor of youtube is the punchline. because the same people who mocked the youtube outcome are now going to spend the next several months explaining why youtube is actually good. of course it can be good. for the right use case. for the right property. inside the right architecture. with the right check attached. but when you spend two years telling everyone you were valued like raw and your next stop is “please subscribe and smash that bell,” maybe stop pretending this is victory formation? i told y’all where this was going. the record is right there. i’m still right. and tony and dave: you guys are see through translucent. that’s it for ye 🎤🎤🎤

Nick LoPiccolo

99,106 次观看 • 2 个月前

Warren Buffett turns 93 today! To celebrate, I'm sharing the greatest lecture he ever gave together with his 94 (!) best investment quotes. 1. Rule No. 1 is never lose money. Rule No. 2 is never forget Rule No. 1. 2. Diversification is a protection against ignorance. It makes very little sense for those who know what they're doing. 3. Do not take yearly results too seriously. Instead, focus on four or five-year averages. 4. All there is to investing is picking good stocks at good times and staying with them as long as they remain good companies. 5. American business - and consequently a basket of stocks - is virtually certain to be worth far more in the years ahead. 6. An investor should act as though he had a lifetime decision card with just twenty punches on it. 7. And so the important thing we do with managers, generally, is to find the .400 hitters and then not tell them how to swing. 8. The most important quality for an investor is temperament, not intellect. You need a temperament that neither derives great pleasure from being with the crowd or against the crowd. 9. Bitcoin has no unique value at all. 10. Buy a stock the way you would buy a house. Understand and like it such that you'd be content to own it in the absence of any market. 11. The years ahead will occasionally deliver major market declines - even panics - that will affect virtually all stocks. No one can tell you when these traumas will occur. 12. I insist on a lot of time being spent, almost every day, to just sit and think. That is very uncommon in American business. 13. Buy companies with strong histories of profitability and with a dominant business franchise. 14. For the investor, a too-high purchase price for the stock of an excellent company can undo the effects of a subsequent decade of favorable business developments. 15. I believe in giving my kids enough so they can do anything, but not so much that they can do nothing. 16. The world went mad. What we learn from history is that people don’t learn from history. 17. The key to investing is not assessing how much an industry is going to affect society, or how much it will grow, but rather determining the competitive advantage of any given company and, above all, the durability of that advantage. 18. Among the various propositions offered to you, if you invested in a very low cost index fund - where you don't put the money in at one time, but average in over 10 years - you'll do better than 90% of people who start investing at the same time. 19. Because if you're wrong and rates go to 2 percent, which I don't think they will, you pay it off. It's a one-way renegotiation. It is an incredibly attractive instrument for the homeowner and you've got a one-way bet. 20. Cash is to a business as oxygen is to an individual: never thought about when it is present, the only thing in mind when it is absent. 21. Don't get caught up with what other people are doing. Being a contrarian isn't the key but being a crowd follower isn't either. You need to detach yourself emotionally. 22. For 240 years it's been a terrible mistake to bet against America, and now is no time to start. 23. I never attempt to make money on the stock market. I buy on the assumption that they could close the market the next day and not reopen it for five years. 24. I have no views as to where it (gold) will be, but the one thing I can tell you is it won't do anything between now and then except look at you. Whereas, you know, Coca-Cola will be making money, and I think Wells Fargo will be making a lot of money, and there will be a lot -- and it's a lot -- it's a lot better to have a goose that keeps laying eggs than a goose that just sits there and eats insurance and storage and a few things like that. 25. I just sit in my office and read all day. 26. I won't say if my candidate doesn't win, and probably half the time they haven't, I'm going to take my ball and go home 27. If returns are going to be 7 or 8 percent and you're paying 1 percent for fees, that makes an enormous difference in how much money you're going to have in retirement. 28. We want products where people feel like kissing you instead of slapping you. 29. If you aren't willing to own a stock for ten years, don't even think about owning it for ten minutes. 30. The most important investment you can make is one in yourself. 31. If you buy things you do not need, soon you will have to sell things you need. 32. If you don't feel comfortable making a rough estimate of the asset's future earnings, just forget it and move on. 33. If you like spending six to eight hours per week working on investments, do it. If you don't, then dollar-cost average into index funds. 34. If you're in the luckiest 1% of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99%. 35. If you're smart, you're going to make a lot of money without borrowing. 36. In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497. 37. In the 54 years (Charlie Munger and I) have worked together, we have never forgone an attractive purchase because of the macro or political environment, or the views of other people. In fact, these subjects never come up when we make decisions 38. In the business world, the rearview mirror is always clearer than the windshield. 39. Investors should remember that excitement and expenses are their enemies. 40. It is a terrible mistake for investors with long-term horizons to measure their investment 'risk' by their portfolio's ratio of bonds to stocks. 41. It is not necessary to do extraordinary things to get extraordinary results. 42. It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently. 43. The one thing I will tell you is the worst investment you can have is cash. Everybody is talking about cash being king and all that sort of thing. Cash is going to become worth less over time. But good businesses are going to become worth more over time. 44. It's been an ideal period for investors: A climate of fear is their best friend. Those who invest only when commentators are upbeat end up paying a heavy price for meaningless reassurance. 45. It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is better than yours and you'll drift in that direction. 46. It's better to have a partial interest in the Hope diamond than to own all of a rhinestone. 47. It's far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price. 48. Just pick a broad index like the S&P 500. Don't put your money in all at once; do it over a period of time. 49. Keep things simple and don't swing for the fences. When promised quick profits, respond with a quick "no”. 50. Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding. Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless. 51. Many management teams are just deciding they're gonna buy X billions over X months. That's no way to buy things. You buy when selling for less than they are worth. ... It's not a complicated equation to figure out whether it is beneficial or not to repurchase shares. 52. The difference between successful people and really successful people is that really successful people say no to almost everything. 53. Most people get interested in stocks when everyone else is. The time to get interested is when no one else is. You can't buy what is popular and do well. 54. Never invest in a business you cannot understand. 55. Your premium brand had better be delivering something special, or it’s not going to get the business. 56. One can best prepare themselves for the economic future by investing in your own education. If you study hard and learn at a young age, you will be in the best circumstances to secure your future. 57. The most important thing to do if you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging. 58. One thing that could help would be to write down the reason you are buying a stock before your purchase. Write down "I am buying Microsoft at $300 billion because..." Force yourself to write this down. It clarifies your mind and discipline. 59. Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked. 60. Opportunities come infrequently. When it rains gold, put out the bucket, not the thimble. 61. Price is what you pay. Value is what you get. 62. Read 500 pages like this every day. That's how knowledge works. It builds up, like compound interest. All of you can do it, but I guarantee not many of you will do it. 63. Risk comes from not knowing what you're doing. 64. If a business does well, the stock eventually follows. 65. Since I know of no way to reliably predict market movements, I recommend that you purchase Berkshire shares only if you expect to hold them for at least five years. Those who seek short-term profits should look elsewhere. 66. Someone's sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree a long time ago 67. The best thing that happens to us is when a great company gets into temporary trouble... We want to buy them when they're on the operating table. 68. Speculation is most dangerous when it looks easiest. 69. Stay away from it. It's a mirage, basically...The idea that it has some huge intrinsic value is a joke in my view. 70. The best chance to deploy capital is when things are going down. 71. The stock market is a no-called-strike game. You don't have to swing at everything -- you can wait for your pitch. 72. There is nothing wrong with a 'know nothing' investor who realizes it. The problem is when you are a 'know nothing' investor but you think you know something. 73. This does not bother Charlie and me. Indeed, we enjoy such price declines if we have funds available to increase our positions. 74. Too-big-to-fail is not a fallback position at Berkshire. Instead, we will always arrange our affairs so that any requirements for cash we may conceivably have will be dwarfed by our own liquidity. 75. There are all kinds of businesses that Charlie and I don’t understand, but that doesn’t cause us to stay up at night. It just means we go on to the next one, and that’s what the individual investor should do. 76. You can’t buy what is popular and do well. 77. We never want to count on the kindness of strangers in order to meet tomorrow's obligations. When forced to choose, I will not trade even a night's sleep for the chance of extra profits. 78. We will reject interesting opportunities rather than over-leverage our balance sheet. 79. We've long felt that the only value of stock forecasters is to make fortune tellers look good. Even now, Charlie and I continue to believe that short-term market forecasts are poison and should be kept locked up in a safe place, away from children and also from grown-ups who behave in the market like children. 80. What is smart at one price is stupid at another. 81. What we learn from history is that people don't learn from history. 82. When stock can be bought below a business's value it is probably the best use of cash. 83. When trillions of dollars are managed by Wall Streeters charging high fees, it will usually be the managers who reap outsized profits, not the clients. 84. When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever. 85. When you have able managers of high character running businesses about which they are passionate, you can have a dozen or more reporting to you and still have time for an afternoon nap. Conversely, if you have even one person reporting to you who is deceitful, inept or uninterested, you will find yourself with more than you can handle. 86. Whether we're talking about socks or stocks, I like buying quality merchandise when it is marked down. 87. Widespread fear is your friend as an investor because it serves up bargain purchases. 88. You are neither right nor wrong because the crowd disagrees with you. You are right because your data and reasoning are right. 89. You can't borrow money at 18 or 20 percent and come out ahead. 90. You can't produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant. 91. The most important quality for an investor is temperament, not intellect… You need a temperament that neither derives great pleasure from being with the crowd or against the crowd. 92. You don't need to be a rocket scientist. Investing is not a game where the guy with the 160 IQ beats the guy with 130 IQ. You only have to be able to evaluate companies within your circle of competence. 93. The size of your circle of competence is not very important; knowing its boundaries, however, is vital.
1:12:41

Warren Buffett turns 93 today! To celebrate, I'm sharing the greatest lecture he ever gave together with his 94 (!) best investment quotes. 1. Rule No. 1 is never lose money. Rule No. 2 is never forget Rule No. 1. 2. Diversification is a protection against ignorance. It makes very little sense for those who know what they're doing. 3. Do not take yearly results too seriously. Instead, focus on four or five-year averages. 4. All there is to investing is picking good stocks at good times and staying with them as long as they remain good companies. 5. American business - and consequently a basket of stocks - is virtually certain to be worth far more in the years ahead. 6. An investor should act as though he had a lifetime decision card with just twenty punches on it. 7. And so the important thing we do with managers, generally, is to find the .400 hitters and then not tell them how to swing. 8. The most important quality for an investor is temperament, not intellect. You need a temperament that neither derives great pleasure from being with the crowd or against the crowd. 9. Bitcoin has no unique value at all. 10. Buy a stock the way you would buy a house. Understand and like it such that you'd be content to own it in the absence of any market. 11. The years ahead will occasionally deliver major market declines - even panics - that will affect virtually all stocks. No one can tell you when these traumas will occur. 12. I insist on a lot of time being spent, almost every day, to just sit and think. That is very uncommon in American business. 13. Buy companies with strong histories of profitability and with a dominant business franchise. 14. For the investor, a too-high purchase price for the stock of an excellent company can undo the effects of a subsequent decade of favorable business developments. 15. I believe in giving my kids enough so they can do anything, but not so much that they can do nothing. 16. The world went mad. What we learn from history is that people don’t learn from history. 17. The key to investing is not assessing how much an industry is going to affect society, or how much it will grow, but rather determining the competitive advantage of any given company and, above all, the durability of that advantage. 18. Among the various propositions offered to you, if you invested in a very low cost index fund - where you don't put the money in at one time, but average in over 10 years - you'll do better than 90% of people who start investing at the same time. 19. Because if you're wrong and rates go to 2 percent, which I don't think they will, you pay it off. It's a one-way renegotiation. It is an incredibly attractive instrument for the homeowner and you've got a one-way bet. 20. Cash is to a business as oxygen is to an individual: never thought about when it is present, the only thing in mind when it is absent. 21. Don't get caught up with what other people are doing. Being a contrarian isn't the key but being a crowd follower isn't either. You need to detach yourself emotionally. 22. For 240 years it's been a terrible mistake to bet against America, and now is no time to start. 23. I never attempt to make money on the stock market. I buy on the assumption that they could close the market the next day and not reopen it for five years. 24. I have no views as to where it (gold) will be, but the one thing I can tell you is it won't do anything between now and then except look at you. Whereas, you know, Coca-Cola will be making money, and I think Wells Fargo will be making a lot of money, and there will be a lot -- and it's a lot -- it's a lot better to have a goose that keeps laying eggs than a goose that just sits there and eats insurance and storage and a few things like that. 25. I just sit in my office and read all day. 26. I won't say if my candidate doesn't win, and probably half the time they haven't, I'm going to take my ball and go home 27. If returns are going to be 7 or 8 percent and you're paying 1 percent for fees, that makes an enormous difference in how much money you're going to have in retirement. 28. We want products where people feel like kissing you instead of slapping you. 29. If you aren't willing to own a stock for ten years, don't even think about owning it for ten minutes. 30. The most important investment you can make is one in yourself. 31. If you buy things you do not need, soon you will have to sell things you need. 32. If you don't feel comfortable making a rough estimate of the asset's future earnings, just forget it and move on. 33. If you like spending six to eight hours per week working on investments, do it. If you don't, then dollar-cost average into index funds. 34. If you're in the luckiest 1% of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99%. 35. If you're smart, you're going to make a lot of money without borrowing. 36. In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497. 37. In the 54 years (Charlie Munger and I) have worked together, we have never forgone an attractive purchase because of the macro or political environment, or the views of other people. In fact, these subjects never come up when we make decisions 38. In the business world, the rearview mirror is always clearer than the windshield. 39. Investors should remember that excitement and expenses are their enemies. 40. It is a terrible mistake for investors with long-term horizons to measure their investment 'risk' by their portfolio's ratio of bonds to stocks. 41. It is not necessary to do extraordinary things to get extraordinary results. 42. It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently. 43. The one thing I will tell you is the worst investment you can have is cash. Everybody is talking about cash being king and all that sort of thing. Cash is going to become worth less over time. But good businesses are going to become worth more over time. 44. It's been an ideal period for investors: A climate of fear is their best friend. Those who invest only when commentators are upbeat end up paying a heavy price for meaningless reassurance. 45. It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is better than yours and you'll drift in that direction. 46. It's better to have a partial interest in the Hope diamond than to own all of a rhinestone. 47. It's far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price. 48. Just pick a broad index like the S&P 500. Don't put your money in all at once; do it over a period of time. 49. Keep things simple and don't swing for the fences. When promised quick profits, respond with a quick "no”. 50. Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding. Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless. 51. Many management teams are just deciding they're gonna buy X billions over X months. That's no way to buy things. You buy when selling for less than they are worth. ... It's not a complicated equation to figure out whether it is beneficial or not to repurchase shares. 52. The difference between successful people and really successful people is that really successful people say no to almost everything. 53. Most people get interested in stocks when everyone else is. The time to get interested is when no one else is. You can't buy what is popular and do well. 54. Never invest in a business you cannot understand. 55. Your premium brand had better be delivering something special, or it’s not going to get the business. 56. One can best prepare themselves for the economic future by investing in your own education. If you study hard and learn at a young age, you will be in the best circumstances to secure your future. 57. The most important thing to do if you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging. 58. One thing that could help would be to write down the reason you are buying a stock before your purchase. Write down "I am buying Microsoft at $300 billion because..." Force yourself to write this down. It clarifies your mind and discipline. 59. Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked. 60. Opportunities come infrequently. When it rains gold, put out the bucket, not the thimble. 61. Price is what you pay. Value is what you get. 62. Read 500 pages like this every day. That's how knowledge works. It builds up, like compound interest. All of you can do it, but I guarantee not many of you will do it. 63. Risk comes from not knowing what you're doing. 64. If a business does well, the stock eventually follows. 65. Since I know of no way to reliably predict market movements, I recommend that you purchase Berkshire shares only if you expect to hold them for at least five years. Those who seek short-term profits should look elsewhere. 66. Someone's sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree a long time ago 67. The best thing that happens to us is when a great company gets into temporary trouble... We want to buy them when they're on the operating table. 68. Speculation is most dangerous when it looks easiest. 69. Stay away from it. It's a mirage, basically...The idea that it has some huge intrinsic value is a joke in my view. 70. The best chance to deploy capital is when things are going down. 71. The stock market is a no-called-strike game. You don't have to swing at everything -- you can wait for your pitch. 72. There is nothing wrong with a 'know nothing' investor who realizes it. The problem is when you are a 'know nothing' investor but you think you know something. 73. This does not bother Charlie and me. Indeed, we enjoy such price declines if we have funds available to increase our positions. 74. Too-big-to-fail is not a fallback position at Berkshire. Instead, we will always arrange our affairs so that any requirements for cash we may conceivably have will be dwarfed by our own liquidity. 75. There are all kinds of businesses that Charlie and I don’t understand, but that doesn’t cause us to stay up at night. It just means we go on to the next one, and that’s what the individual investor should do. 76. You can’t buy what is popular and do well. 77. We never want to count on the kindness of strangers in order to meet tomorrow's obligations. When forced to choose, I will not trade even a night's sleep for the chance of extra profits. 78. We will reject interesting opportunities rather than over-leverage our balance sheet. 79. We've long felt that the only value of stock forecasters is to make fortune tellers look good. Even now, Charlie and I continue to believe that short-term market forecasts are poison and should be kept locked up in a safe place, away from children and also from grown-ups who behave in the market like children. 80. What is smart at one price is stupid at another. 81. What we learn from history is that people don't learn from history. 82. When stock can be bought below a business's value it is probably the best use of cash. 83. When trillions of dollars are managed by Wall Streeters charging high fees, it will usually be the managers who reap outsized profits, not the clients. 84. When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever. 85. When you have able managers of high character running businesses about which they are passionate, you can have a dozen or more reporting to you and still have time for an afternoon nap. Conversely, if you have even one person reporting to you who is deceitful, inept or uninterested, you will find yourself with more than you can handle. 86. Whether we're talking about socks or stocks, I like buying quality merchandise when it is marked down. 87. Widespread fear is your friend as an investor because it serves up bargain purchases. 88. You are neither right nor wrong because the crowd disagrees with you. You are right because your data and reasoning are right. 89. You can't borrow money at 18 or 20 percent and come out ahead. 90. You can't produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant. 91. The most important quality for an investor is temperament, not intellect… You need a temperament that neither derives great pleasure from being with the crowd or against the crowd. 92. You don't need to be a rocket scientist. Investing is not a game where the guy with the 160 IQ beats the guy with 130 IQ. You only have to be able to evaluate companies within your circle of competence. 93. The size of your circle of competence is not very important; knowing its boundaries, however, is vital.

Compounding Quality

620,915 次观看 • 2 年前

😏Secrets of deceleration assessment… it’s not about the turn.🙋🏽‍♂️ For 15 years I have studied great coaches. A common thread has been that they all use intense actions as movement screens. Thus they have a great coaching eye. ❓Why intense actions? 🙋🏽‍♂️Analysis of sprinting, stoping , turning , hopping, jumping, cutting, backwards running opens a diagnostic window to assess how athletes create pretension and share load across their system. dpfaff has made this clear 🏥Be it for rehab (physios are coaches in my world) or for explosive sports. It’s the same screen, but through different lenses 🧐🤓 👀What are they looking at? 💡The same thing as you. 👀What do they SEE? 🤔Well that’s a different story. Damian Harper, PhD has set the scene for what metrics matter and Tom Dos'Santos has re-clarified the shapes that are safe vs effective for deceleration and COD. ↩️When you watch a 180 degree turn, all the focus is on the turn. Turning and being perturbed at speed is the ultimate speed ability for team sports and also a moment of tragedy for knees and hamstrings. To assess turning efficiency we use vuemotion to measure the shapes , velocities , decelerations and movement efficiency of team sports players. We create PSR reports to simplify the metrics and make it actionable for our clients across professional leagues. ⚽️🏀🏈🥎🎾🏉 📝The plant step is important but is highly impacted by the previous 1-5 steps. 🦘Just like in the Olympics. A good take off in the long jump is the result of the preceding 4-5 “steering steps”. This applies to any jumping when we are converting horizontal to vertical momentum… ❓Does it continue to happen in Braking, COD and agility… 💡These penultimate steps are critical for steering , and are how we constantly adjust our locomaotion. 📝Frans Bosch has made it clear, efficient execution of intense actions are characterised by optimal limb SWITCH and the associated reflexive postures of hip lock. 🤔What movement preference can be observed in the penultimate, antipenultimate, preantipenultimate , propreantipenultimate steps during an intense deceleration? 🤔What clues can you get about a players triple flexion ability? Do they share the load? 🤔How do they coordinate co contractions around hip and knee? Can they sit to create leverage? 🤔 What do asymmetries say about physical qualities and player confidence? 🧪When assessing deceleration for team sports we recognise the 15-0-5 for its maximal intensities but we utilise the 10-0-5 more often because we can get more reps and teaching moments out of it. Needless to say we love ᴍᴀʀᴛɪɴ ʙᴜᴄʜʜᴇɪᴛ new paper on the topic. Key Highlights: 🔹 Effective Pressing: Crucial for disrupting opponents and regaining possession, enhancing offensive opportunities. 🔹 Injury Risks: Pressing increases injury risks, particularly ACL injuries. 🔹 Realistic Training: We compared the 15-0-5 change of direction test with actual match-pressing actions to enhance testing and training realism. 🔹 Peak Speeds: Similar peak speeds in 15-0-5 and match-pressing actions validate the 15-0-5 as a practical tool for assessing and training pressing demands. 🔹 Future Directions (1): Incorporate variability in speed, angle of change in direction and deceleration demands, along with perception-action challenges for better simulation of game conditions. 🔹 Future Directions (2): Motorized sprint resistance devices can enhance assessment and training, providing valuable data for player development and injury prevention. #Football #SportsScience #Research #Training #InjuryPrevention #PerformanceOptimization #EliteAthletes
0:47

😏Secrets of deceleration assessment… it’s not about the turn.🙋🏽‍♂️ For 15 years I have studied great coaches. A common thread has been that they all use intense actions as movement screens. Thus they have a great coaching eye. ❓Why intense actions? 🙋🏽‍♂️Analysis of sprinting, stoping , turning , hopping, jumping, cutting, backwards running opens a diagnostic window to assess how athletes create pretension and share load across their system. dpfaff has made this clear 🏥Be it for rehab (physios are coaches in my world) or for explosive sports. It’s the same screen, but through different lenses 🧐🤓 👀What are they looking at? 💡The same thing as you. 👀What do they SEE? 🤔Well that’s a different story. Damian Harper, PhD has set the scene for what metrics matter and Tom Dos'Santos has re-clarified the shapes that are safe vs effective for deceleration and COD. ↩️When you watch a 180 degree turn, all the focus is on the turn. Turning and being perturbed at speed is the ultimate speed ability for team sports and also a moment of tragedy for knees and hamstrings. To assess turning efficiency we use vuemotion to measure the shapes , velocities , decelerations and movement efficiency of team sports players. We create PSR reports to simplify the metrics and make it actionable for our clients across professional leagues. ⚽️🏀🏈🥎🎾🏉 📝The plant step is important but is highly impacted by the previous 1-5 steps. 🦘Just like in the Olympics. A good take off in the long jump is the result of the preceding 4-5 “steering steps”. This applies to any jumping when we are converting horizontal to vertical momentum… ❓Does it continue to happen in Braking, COD and agility… 💡These penultimate steps are critical for steering , and are how we constantly adjust our locomaotion. 📝Frans Bosch has made it clear, efficient execution of intense actions are characterised by optimal limb SWITCH and the associated reflexive postures of hip lock. 🤔What movement preference can be observed in the penultimate, antipenultimate, preantipenultimate , propreantipenultimate steps during an intense deceleration? 🤔What clues can you get about a players triple flexion ability? Do they share the load? 🤔How do they coordinate co contractions around hip and knee? Can they sit to create leverage? 🤔 What do asymmetries say about physical qualities and player confidence? 🧪When assessing deceleration for team sports we recognise the 15-0-5 for its maximal intensities but we utilise the 10-0-5 more often because we can get more reps and teaching moments out of it. Needless to say we love ᴍᴀʀᴛɪɴ ʙᴜᴄʜʜᴇɪᴛ new paper on the topic. Key Highlights: 🔹 Effective Pressing: Crucial for disrupting opponents and regaining possession, enhancing offensive opportunities. 🔹 Injury Risks: Pressing increases injury risks, particularly ACL injuries. 🔹 Realistic Training: We compared the 15-0-5 change of direction test with actual match-pressing actions to enhance testing and training realism. 🔹 Peak Speeds: Similar peak speeds in 15-0-5 and match-pressing actions validate the 15-0-5 as a practical tool for assessing and training pressing demands. 🔹 Future Directions (1): Incorporate variability in speed, angle of change in direction and deceleration demands, along with perception-action challenges for better simulation of game conditions. 🔹 Future Directions (2): Motorized sprint resistance devices can enhance assessment and training, providing valuable data for player development and injury prevention. #Football #SportsScience #Research #Training #InjuryPrevention #PerformanceOptimization #EliteAthletes

Jonas Dodoo

53,933 次观看 • 2 年前