Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

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 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)

СпортНовости и политикаОбразование
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 10

Фото профиля Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 год назад

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.

Фото профиля Noah Basketball
Noah Basketball1 год назад

🏀 "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.

Фото профиля Brett
Brett1 год назад

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

Фото профиля Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 год назад

Films not for everyone

Фото профиля JetPack Galileo
JetPack Galileo1 год назад

yeah

Фото профиля Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 год назад

The sharps agree 👀

Фото профиля Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 год назад

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

Фото профиля Brett
Brett1 год назад

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

Фото профиля Val Dewar (Creole Maple Hot Sauce Enjoyer)
Val Dewar (Creole Maple Hot Sauce Enjoyer)1 год назад

He still rb2 for ya?

Фото профиля Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT
Jeff Mueller, PT, DPT1 год назад

No

Похожие видео

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 просмотров • 1 год назад

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 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

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 просмотров • 2 лет назад

🦘🇦🇺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.

229,641 просмотров • 1 год назад

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 просмотров • 1 год назад

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 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Most of you guys don't know that I grew up as a Christian missionary kid, with both of my parents in full-time ministry. What this meant is that I grew up seeing my parents imperfectly strive to be the hands and feet of Jesus. There were times when a homeless lady slept on our couch downstairs and a homeless man in a tent in our backyard. Other times when our side street was full of tables and people from the neighborhood as we fed the hungry. Constantly because I was homeschooled, school would be interrupted to help someone move something or donate stuff to the ministry thrift store. As a kid I often thought about how much more my parents could do if they had more money. That's where my desire to learn how to make money started because I wanted to be able to help their ministry. Somewhere along this journey I started to lose the plot and started to care more about money than God, which is a horrible place to get to. This morning while I was praying and thanking God for afflicting me, because truly before I was afflicted I went astray but now I love His law. A song that I wrote, I believe when I was around nine or ten years old, came back to my mind and truly it blows me away that my nine-year-old self had more wisdom at times than my late twenties self and my thirty-one-year-old self. And the reason for that is simple. All wisdom comes from God and man's wisdom is nothing compared to his, which means that if God wants to give a nine-year-old some wisdom, it can be greater than that of a PhD professor whose wisdom comes only from man. This is the song I wrote as a little boy. Verse 1: How crazy are everyday worries! How crazy the things that we dread! Oh how pointless the things that we long for! Oh how pointless the lives that we live! Chorus: How crazy, how crazy How pointless, how pointless can we live? Verse 2: We know who we should long for. We know who we should praise. We know who we should obey. But it's easier said than done. I remember my parents telling me that it was pretty good but no one would want to sing it because the chorus was too depressing and people want to be uplifted. So from then on I would just sing it to myself because I didn't think it was depressing because it reminded me about what mattered. It reminded me that everything the world told me mattered didn't. Sometimes I would use the song to pray, too, before I went to bed or after I woke up. Jesus Christ is the one that we should long for. He's the one that we should praise, and he is the one that we must obey. For Jesus says, "If you love me you will do what I command." Maybe you're reading this, extremely skeptical of God or any religion. I just would ask you: what's going to be the end of everything you're pursuing now? Is your life not like a breath, here today and gone tomorrow? Is all of the money that you're gathering not simply going to be left to someone else for you're not going to be able to take any of it with you? Will not all of your memories that you cherish so dearly be lost with you when you die? Is not the fruit of all that you're pursuing meaningless if there is no God for the end of the universe is cold, dark, and lifeless and not even the generations between now and lifelessness will remember you? If there was no God there would be nothing. Just like if you live like there is no God, all of your pursuits will come to nothing. Yet "God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son so that whoever believes in him shall not perish but shall have everlasting life." You see we don't have a God of this universe who is impersonal who doesn't care for us. No he desires a relationship with us and the way that we know that is because he literally limited himself and came to earth as a man to show us the way to eternal life. He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." When Jesus truly becomes the one you treasure above all else and when you look at Him, the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, He who dwells in unapproachable light, who no man has ever seen, and to whom belongs glory and eternal dominion. When you look at that and your heart becomes set upon nothing but His kingdom, He makes your path straight. He gives you work to do that will store up fruit in eternity that already today can earn you wages that will be everlasting. He will make our lives on this Earth not meaningless but full of far more meaning than we can even grasp, comprehend, or imagine. Lord, I just lift up every single reader of this post and ask that You would open their eyes, God, by the power of Your Spirit. That You would soften their hearts, Lord, and give them understanding by the fullness of Your power, Lord, because by human wisdom Your Kingdom cannot be grasped. So Lord, call them by Your Spirit that they may answer You, that they may repent and that they may live starting today for eternal life. Amen.
1:10

Most of you guys don't know that I grew up as a Christian missionary kid, with both of my parents in full-time ministry. What this meant is that I grew up seeing my parents imperfectly strive to be the hands and feet of Jesus. There were times when a homeless lady slept on our couch downstairs and a homeless man in a tent in our backyard. Other times when our side street was full of tables and people from the neighborhood as we fed the hungry. Constantly because I was homeschooled, school would be interrupted to help someone move something or donate stuff to the ministry thrift store. As a kid I often thought about how much more my parents could do if they had more money. That's where my desire to learn how to make money started because I wanted to be able to help their ministry. Somewhere along this journey I started to lose the plot and started to care more about money than God, which is a horrible place to get to. This morning while I was praying and thanking God for afflicting me, because truly before I was afflicted I went astray but now I love His law. A song that I wrote, I believe when I was around nine or ten years old, came back to my mind and truly it blows me away that my nine-year-old self had more wisdom at times than my late twenties self and my thirty-one-year-old self. And the reason for that is simple. All wisdom comes from God and man's wisdom is nothing compared to his, which means that if God wants to give a nine-year-old some wisdom, it can be greater than that of a PhD professor whose wisdom comes only from man. This is the song I wrote as a little boy. Verse 1: How crazy are everyday worries! How crazy the things that we dread! Oh how pointless the things that we long for! Oh how pointless the lives that we live! Chorus: How crazy, how crazy How pointless, how pointless can we live? Verse 2: We know who we should long for. We know who we should praise. We know who we should obey. But it's easier said than done. I remember my parents telling me that it was pretty good but no one would want to sing it because the chorus was too depressing and people want to be uplifted. So from then on I would just sing it to myself because I didn't think it was depressing because it reminded me about what mattered. It reminded me that everything the world told me mattered didn't. Sometimes I would use the song to pray, too, before I went to bed or after I woke up. Jesus Christ is the one that we should long for. He's the one that we should praise, and he is the one that we must obey. For Jesus says, "If you love me you will do what I command." Maybe you're reading this, extremely skeptical of God or any religion. I just would ask you: what's going to be the end of everything you're pursuing now? Is your life not like a breath, here today and gone tomorrow? Is all of the money that you're gathering not simply going to be left to someone else for you're not going to be able to take any of it with you? Will not all of your memories that you cherish so dearly be lost with you when you die? Is not the fruit of all that you're pursuing meaningless if there is no God for the end of the universe is cold, dark, and lifeless and not even the generations between now and lifelessness will remember you? If there was no God there would be nothing. Just like if you live like there is no God, all of your pursuits will come to nothing. Yet "God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son so that whoever believes in him shall not perish but shall have everlasting life." You see we don't have a God of this universe who is impersonal who doesn't care for us. No he desires a relationship with us and the way that we know that is because he literally limited himself and came to earth as a man to show us the way to eternal life. He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." When Jesus truly becomes the one you treasure above all else and when you look at Him, the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, He who dwells in unapproachable light, who no man has ever seen, and to whom belongs glory and eternal dominion. When you look at that and your heart becomes set upon nothing but His kingdom, He makes your path straight. He gives you work to do that will store up fruit in eternity that already today can earn you wages that will be everlasting. He will make our lives on this Earth not meaningless but full of far more meaning than we can even grasp, comprehend, or imagine. Lord, I just lift up every single reader of this post and ask that You would open their eyes, God, by the power of Your Spirit. That You would soften their hearts, Lord, and give them understanding by the fullness of Your power, Lord, because by human wisdom Your Kingdom cannot be grasped. So Lord, call them by Your Spirit that they may answer You, that they may repent and that they may live starting today for eternal life. Amen.

Jake Browatzke 🚀

11,304 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

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 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

49ers - Chargers in the books. What a treat that practice was. Harbaugh, Shanahan, Purdy, Herbert and so much more... Highlights and *context*: 🏈49ers defense obviously needs Nick Bosa, but thankfully do they have Osa. SF struggled to set edges early; that led to some big Keaton Mitchell runs and play-action success for Herbert and Co. — including wide-open David Njoku TD and a Quentin Johnson TD vs Deommodore Lenoir 🏈That said, some of the deep-ball highlight clips (like Herbert to Brenen Thompson over Ji'Ayir Brown) floating online would've been Odighizuwa sacks. He lived in LA's backfield — but couldn't touch Herbert since it was practice 🏈Kaelon Black is back and has **impressive** burst. Immediately noticed the difference between him and 49ers' backup RBs of recent practices. Black also looks stronger than 208 pounds — that's a lot of muscle moving at a high rate of speed 🏈In red zone, 49ers QB Adrian Martinez hit Black on an angle route for a TD 🏈De'Zhaun Stribling made a sweet TD grab on a jump-ball fade from Mac Jones in RZ, although the 49ers saw relatively limited success there. They still have all the makings of a very good RZ team. "Hell yeah, Stribbles!" yelled a 49ers' O-linemen 🏈Jones threw an INT to LA CB Eric Rogers earlier. Pass was intended for 49ers WR Jordan Watkins, who was outmuscled by the 6-2 Rogers. Watkins later couldn't hold onto a desperation RZ heave from Purdy in the end zone that certainly gave him a chance 🏈In general, Jones has not been overly accurate this camp, but there were also misfires last year at this time. The guy proved himself as a gamer last season and the 49ers aren't worried 🏈Treated to a few Trent Williams vs Khalil Mack reps. Walking Hall of Famers 🏈Sweet run stuff from 49ers LB Garret Wallow, whom Fred Warner praised heavily, against LA RB Jarret Patterson 🏈49ers offense started hot but finished worse once practice graduated to move-the-ball sessions. Opposite was generally true on the other side, where the 49ers defense started better asserting itself later — included a Fred Warner punch out of Njoku 🏈Chargers DE Andre Carter II, who worked out for the 49ers a couple weeks ago, ripped past SF rookie LT Enrique Cruz Jr. on a RZ rep. Williams helped coached Cruz up a few minutes later 🏈Rookie 49ers DT James Thompson Jr. had an awesome swim move vs LA LG Jake Slaughter. The 6-6 Thompson's stock seems to rise on a daily basis. Fellow rookie DT Bryson Eason, a much wider/stouter frame, also held his ground well vs the run 🏈Early on was a trial-by-fire day for 49ers rookie CB Ephesians Prysock, who was beaten a couple times downfield by Brenen Thompson 🏈No music at practice today so hilarious to listen to Mike Evans lobbying the officials like a truly seasoned HOF-bound vet. Evans left practice early with a wrap around his quad but Shanahan said it was just precautionary 🏈Mike Shanahan in attendance for this practice 🏈Did Jim Harbaugh ever get to meet Brock Purdy? Let's end on that cliffhanger...
0:59

49ers - Chargers in the books. What a treat that practice was. Harbaugh, Shanahan, Purdy, Herbert and so much more... Highlights and *context*: 🏈49ers defense obviously needs Nick Bosa, but thankfully do they have Osa. SF struggled to set edges early; that led to some big Keaton Mitchell runs and play-action success for Herbert and Co. — including wide-open David Njoku TD and a Quentin Johnson TD vs Deommodore Lenoir 🏈That said, some of the deep-ball highlight clips (like Herbert to Brenen Thompson over Ji'Ayir Brown) floating online would've been Odighizuwa sacks. He lived in LA's backfield — but couldn't touch Herbert since it was practice 🏈Kaelon Black is back and has **impressive** burst. Immediately noticed the difference between him and 49ers' backup RBs of recent practices. Black also looks stronger than 208 pounds — that's a lot of muscle moving at a high rate of speed 🏈In red zone, 49ers QB Adrian Martinez hit Black on an angle route for a TD 🏈De'Zhaun Stribling made a sweet TD grab on a jump-ball fade from Mac Jones in RZ, although the 49ers saw relatively limited success there. They still have all the makings of a very good RZ team. "Hell yeah, Stribbles!" yelled a 49ers' O-linemen 🏈Jones threw an INT to LA CB Eric Rogers earlier. Pass was intended for 49ers WR Jordan Watkins, who was outmuscled by the 6-2 Rogers. Watkins later couldn't hold onto a desperation RZ heave from Purdy in the end zone that certainly gave him a chance 🏈In general, Jones has not been overly accurate this camp, but there were also misfires last year at this time. The guy proved himself as a gamer last season and the 49ers aren't worried 🏈Treated to a few Trent Williams vs Khalil Mack reps. Walking Hall of Famers 🏈Sweet run stuff from 49ers LB Garret Wallow, whom Fred Warner praised heavily, against LA RB Jarret Patterson 🏈49ers offense started hot but finished worse once practice graduated to move-the-ball sessions. Opposite was generally true on the other side, where the 49ers defense started better asserting itself later — included a Fred Warner punch out of Njoku 🏈Chargers DE Andre Carter II, who worked out for the 49ers a couple weeks ago, ripped past SF rookie LT Enrique Cruz Jr. on a RZ rep. Williams helped coached Cruz up a few minutes later 🏈Rookie 49ers DT James Thompson Jr. had an awesome swim move vs LA LG Jake Slaughter. The 6-6 Thompson's stock seems to rise on a daily basis. Fellow rookie DT Bryson Eason, a much wider/stouter frame, also held his ground well vs the run 🏈Early on was a trial-by-fire day for 49ers rookie CB Ephesians Prysock, who was beaten a couple times downfield by Brenen Thompson 🏈No music at practice today so hilarious to listen to Mike Evans lobbying the officials like a truly seasoned HOF-bound vet. Evans left practice early with a wrap around his quad but Shanahan said it was just precautionary 🏈Mike Shanahan in attendance for this practice 🏈Did Jim Harbaugh ever get to meet Brock Purdy? Let's end on that cliffhanger...

David Lombardi

74,229 просмотров • 18 дней назад

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

34,213 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

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 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

"The label just says No Brand" GRWM w Desi Generated on Atlas Cloud Wan 3.0 Prime Esr upscale stitched together on ElevenCreative studio prompt Desi: South Asian woman, mid-20s, warm brown skin with natural, realistic texture — visible pores, subtle natural sheen, no airbrushed smoothness. Expressive dark brown eyes, defined brows, full lips. Long dark wavy hair, undone/messy at the start. No jewelry until the earrings beat. Gold jhumka earrings and thin gold necklace are her fixed accessories once applied. Environment — Desi's Bedroom: Modest, lived-in bedroom, soft neutral-toned walls, single window with sheer curtains, warm diffused morning light with real shadow falloff. Wooden/laminate flooring, small woven area rug. Flows from bed area to vanity/mirror corner to a closet/wardrobe area to a doorway. Bed: simple platform frame, unmade, muted duvet, mismatched pillows, folded throw, nightstand with a plain ceramic mug, analog alarm clock, small lamp. Vanity: wooden dresser, plain oval mirror, small ceramic dish holding her rings/studs/jhumka earrings, a plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" in small black sans-serif text, a plain wooden hairbrush — all visible on the surface from the start. Wardrobe area: simple open wardrobe/hangers with a small handful of plain unbranded clothing already visible. Doorway: simple wooden door, softly lit hallway beyond. Visual style (all blocks): Cinematic realism, not commercial polish. Soft natural film-like grain, warm slightly imperfect color grading true to real morning light. Skin genuinely textured, never smoothed or beauty-filtered. Smooth floating steadicam/gimbal camera movement throughout, cinematic framing sensibility, not raw flat phone footage. Audio style (all blocks): Warm, natural, close-mic room-tone quality, not sterile or studio-clean. Real object-contact sounds, natural room reverb on her voice. No music, no artificial sound effects. Standing negatives (repeat in every block): No AI morphing of any kind — no shifting, warping, or unstable facial features, body proportions, or object shapes. No items suddenly appearing or disappearing in frame — every object must already be visible in its place before she interacts with it. No over-polished or beauty-filtered skin — natural texture and imperfection required throughout. No overly clean, sterile, or commercial visual grade. No duplicate Desi in any frame. No identity drift from block to block. Every product/container shows either no text/logo or exactly the plain "NO BRAND" mark — simple black sans-serif on plain packaging. No recognizable real-world brand names, logos, or trademarked packaging/clothing design anywhere in frame. No extra fingers, fused hands, or distorted anatomy. No text overlays or captions. No music — natural ambient audio only. Mirror reflections physically accurate and consistent; camera never visible in any reflection. No sudden speed changes, no time-lapse compression, no rushed dialogue delivery. BLOCK 1 — [0:00–0:15] The Alarm, Waking, Yawn, First Line Continuity note: Opening block — no prior frame to match. Action: Dark, close frame on Desi's sleeping face, soft warm morning light beginning to catch her skin's natural texture. A phone alarm begins ringing on the nightstand. Hold on her unmoving for a real beat as it rings. Her hand fumbles slowly toward the sound, silences it. She lies still a moment longer, then opens her eyes slowly, squinting at the light. She yawns — full, unhurried, genuine — stretching slightly where she lies. A long pause settles after. Dialogue: (after the yawn, slow, groggy, real pauses) "Okay... (pause) ...so it is way too early for this..." (long pause, slow exhale) "...but let's get ready anyway." Camera: Static-to-slow-float — begins locked close on her face, only beginning the faintest float as she finishes speaking, ending the block just as she starts to shift toward sitting up. Block-specific negatives: The alarm sound must play first, before any dialogue or visible movement. Do not have her wake up abruptly or sit up quickly — the entire block stays in slow, groggy stillness. Do not begin the standing/sitting motion before the final line completes. BLOCK 2 — [0:15–0:30] Five More Minutes + Coffee Stretch Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 1 ended — Desi still lying down, having just finished her line, beginning to shift toward sitting up. Match her position, the room's lighting, and her expression precisely to Block 1's final frame. Action: She sits up fully, stretches with a real, full arms-overhead extension, laughs softly at herself. She reaches for the ceramic mug already present on the nightstand, takes a slow sip, holds it a moment, exhales contentedly. Only after finishing the sip does she swing her legs out and stand, unhurried. Dialogue: "Five more minutes..." (pause, small laugh) "...turned into not five minutes." (beat) "Classic." (pause, after the sip) "Okay." (beat) "...That helps." Camera: Smooth floating steadicam, holding a steady elevated angle through the stretch, following her rise to standing by the block's end. Block-specific negatives: Do not skip or shorten the full stretch. The sip of coffee must complete before she stands — no simultaneous drinking-and-standing. Do not have her rush to her feet; the stand is the final motion of the block, unhurried. BLOCK 3 — [0:30–0:45] Moisturizer Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 2 ended — Desi just risen to standing beside the bed. This block covers her walk to the vanity and the full moisturizer application. Match her position and the room's light to Block 2's final frame. Action: Camera drifts with her as she walks unhurried from the bed to the vanity, arriving at the mirror. The plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" is already visible on the vanity surface as she arrives. She unscrews the lid slowly, scoops a small amount, and applies it in full, unhurried circular motions across her face — the entire application shown start to finish within this block. Dialogue: (spoken only once the application is fully finished, near the block's end) "This is like..." (pause) "...the one step I actually never skip." (beat) "Everything else is negotiable." Camera: Floating lateral tracking during the walk, settling into a steady medium shot at the mirror for the application itself. Block-specific negatives: The jar must already be visible on the vanity before she reaches for it — no appearing mid-motion. The application must be shown completing in full before any dialogue begins. Do not rush the walk to the mirror to make room for the application — both get real, unhurried time within the 15 seconds. BLOCK 4 — [0:45–1:00] Hairbrush + Earrings Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 3 ended — Desi standing at the mirror, moisturizer just applied. Match her position and expression to Block 3's final frame. Action: She picks up the plain wooden hairbrush, already resting on the vanity, and brushes out her hair with several full, unhurried strokes, working through it completely. She sets the brush down, then picks up her gold jhumka earrings from the ceramic dish and puts them on one at a time — each fully finished and settled before she begins the second. Dialogue: (mid-brushing) "Yeah, I don't even know what's in that jar anymore." (soft laugh) "The label just says 'No Brand.'" (beat, as she puts in the second earring) "...Works though." Camera: Steady medium-close shot at the mirror, holding through both the brushing and the earrings without cutting away. Block-specific negatives: The hairbrush and earrings must both already be visible on the vanity from the block's start. The first earring must be fully in place before she begins the second — no simultaneous application. Do not shorten the number of brush strokes to save time; let the motion read as genuinely unhurried. BLOCK 5 — [1:00–1:15] Wardrobe Change (Revised: Explicit Detail + Locked Outfit) Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 4 ended — Desi at the mirror, both earrings now in place. This block covers her moving to the wardrobe area and changing. New Outfit — Locked Reference (carries into Block 6 and any future scenes): A simple, plain white or cream-colored short-sleeve cotton top with a round or slightly scooped neckline, no graphics, no visible branding — soft, everyday fabric with natural draping and slight creasing. Paired with plain straight-leg or slightly relaxed-fit trousers in a muted neutral tone (soft khaki, warm taupe, or dark grey), no visible logos, no stitched branding on pockets or waistband. Simple flat sandals or bare feet, consistent with the casual, staying-home-in-the-morning energy of the piece. This exact combination — top, trousers, footwear — must remain identical through Block 6 and any subsequent generation; treat it as a locked reference image once established. Action, explicitly detailed: Camera follows her as she walks from the vanity toward the wardrobe area, where the clothing has been visible on the rod/hangers since the environment was established — including the specific white/cream top and neutral trousers she will select, already hanging there from the start. She reaches the wardrobe, looks over the few items for a moment, unhurried, and lifts the plain white top and the neutral trousers off their hangers, laying them briefly over her arm or the chair. She turns slightly away from camera or angles herself naturally at the wardrobe (matter-of-fact, not performative), and removes her sleep t-shirt first — pulling it up and off in one unhurried motion, setting it aside on the chair or a nearby surface. She then pulls the plain white top on over her head, arms finding the sleeves naturally, settling the fabric down over her torso with a small adjusting tug at the hem. She then steps out of her sleep bottoms or loungewear pants — sitting briefly on the edge of the chair or bed if needed for balance, one leg at a time — and pulls on the neutral trousers, standing to fasten or settle them at the waist, a small natural motion to smooth them down her hips. Once fully dressed, she does a small self-check — glancing down at the outfit, smoothing the top's hem once more, rolling one sleeve cuff slightly — before turning back toward the mirror. Dialogue: "Okay..." (pause, mid-change) "...let's see." (beat, once dressed, considering the outfit) "...Yeah. That works." Camera: Floating steadicam following her to the wardrobe, holding a respectful medium distance throughout the change — matter-of-fact framing, never a close or lingering angle, treating the change the way an ordinary morning routine would actually look on camera, not stylized or drawn out for effect. Block-specific negatives: The white top and neutral trousers must already be visible hanging in the wardrobe from the start of the block — no appearing only once she reaches for them. The change must be shown as a clear, complete sequence — sleep shirt removed, new top pulled on, sleep bottoms removed, new trousers pulled on — with no skipped steps or instant swaps between states. The change must read as ordinary and unhurried but not sexualized or dwelt upon — medium-distance framing throughout, natural body positioning, nothing posed. No outfit teleporting at any point — every layer change must be visibly performed by her, not implied through a cut or dissolve (there are no cuts in this piece regardless). This exact outfit (plain white/cream short-sleeve top, neutral trousers, sandals or bare feet) is now the locked wardrobe reference for the remainder of the piece — it must not vary in color, cut, or detail in Block 6 or any subsequent scene. BLOCK 6 — 1:15–1:30 FINAL LOOK → WALK OUT CONTINUITY OPEN Block 6 begins immediately from the final frame of Block 5. There is no cut. Desi stands in front of the mirror wearing the exact outfit established in Block 5. Her: white/cream top; neutral trousers; footwear; gold jhumka earrings; gold necklace; hairstyle; makeup; facial features remain exactly consistent. --- 1:15–1:20 FINAL MIRROR CHECK Desi faces the oval mirror. The camera floats gently into position behind/alongside her. She looks at her reflection. A genuine pause. She looks down briefly at the outfit. Smooths the top once. Looks back at herself. A tiny satisfied nod. No exaggerated posing. No influencer-style presentation. She simply looks like someone deciding that she is ready enough to leave. --- 1:20–1:26 WALK TOWARD DOOR Desi turns away from the mirror. The camera smoothly follows. She walks through the bedroom toward the doorway. Her pace remains natural and unhurried. The camera never overtakes her. No whip-pan. No sudden acceleration. No speed ramp. The hallway beyond the doorway is already visible. Morning light spills naturally from the hallway. Dialogue Desi: "Okay." pause "Human." beat "Presentable." pause "Good enough." A small genuine laugh. --- 1:26–1:30 EXIT Desi reaches the doorway. She opens the wooden door. Warm hallway light falls across her. She steps through. The camera continues following her naturally. Just before she disappears completely, she turns her head slightly toward the camera. A genuine late-arriving smile. Dialogue "Alright..." pause "...let's go be a person today." beat "Bye." She exits. The camera remains inside the bedroom. It settles naturally on the empty doorway. Hold for one quiet beat. END. --- MASTER NEGATIVES & CONSTRAINTS BLOCKS 5–6 CONTINUITY One continuous physical camera take. Zero hard cuts. Zero hidden cuts. Zero jump cuts. Zero dissolves. Zero fades between states. Zero time skips. Zero time-lapse. Zero teleportation. Zero duplicated footage. Zero sudden camera repositioning. WHIP-PAN ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY. It occurs exclusively during the wardrobe change in Block 5. The whip-pan must: physically originate from the camera's current position; move through the same bedroom; temporarily obscure Desi; return naturally to the wardrobe area. It must never be used as a disguised cut. No whip-pan during Block 6. --- NO MORPHING / NO MESHING Absolutely no: face morphing; facial meshing; body morphing; wardrobe morphing; texture morphing; object morphing; environmental morphing; frame interpolation artifacts; identity blending; unstable facial geometry; unstable hands; unstable hair; unstable jewelry. Desi must remain the same woman throughout the entire sequence. --- IDENTITY LOCK Do not alter: eyes; eyebrows; nose; lips; jaw; cheekbones; skin tone; face shape; body proportions; age; hair texture; hairline. No identity drift. No alternate version of Desi. No duplicate Desi. No phantom Desi. --- WARDROBE CHANGE The wardrobe change must be physically believable. No: instant outfit swap; outfit teleportation; clothing appearing on her body; clothing disappearing from her body; clothing growing onto her; magical transition; glowing transformation; particle effect; dissolve; morph. The single whip-pan simply gives privacy while maintaining the continuous physical flow of the camera. --- OBJECT CONTINUITY No object may suddenly appear or disappear. The following must remain spatially consistent: wardrobe; clothing; chair; vanity; mirror; jewelry; dresser; plants; rug; door; hallway. The white/cream top and neutral trousers must be visibly hanging in the wardrobe before Desi selects them. --- OUTFIT LOCK Once Desi finishes changing: WHITE/CREAM SHORT-SLEEVE TOP + EXACT NEUTRAL TROUSERS + SAME FOOTWEAR must remain unchanged through the end. No recoloring. No redesign. No different sleeve length. No different trouser cut. No different footwear. No spontaneous accessories. --- MIRROR CONSISTENCY Mirror reflection must be physically accurate at all times. One Desi. Reflection matches her movements exactly. No reflection drift. No alternate face. No duplicated reflection. No delayed reflection. Camera never appears in the mirror. --- ANATOMY No: extra fingers; missing fingers; fused fingers; duplicated hands; malformed hands; warped arms; elongated limbs; distorted torso; unnatural joints; anatomical meshing. --- VISUAL STYLE Cinematic realism. Natural morning light. Natural skin pores and texture. Subtle film-like grain. Slightly imperfect real-world color. No: beauty filter; plastic skin; excessive skin smoothing; glossy commercial lighting; HDR; hyper-clean advertising aesthetic; artificial glow; excessive sharpening. --- AUDIO Continuous natural audio only: footsteps; fabric movement; clothing rustle; jewelry movement; room ambience; natural breathing; door movement; hallway ambience; Desi's natural voice. No music. No cinematic impact sounds. No artificial transition sounds. No sound effect accompanying the whip-pan. --- VOICE Warm low-mid female voice. Natural morning rasp. Close and intimate. Slow. Unhurried. Conversational. Real pauses between phrases. Never sounds like a commercial, narrator, actress, or influencer reading a script. Do not compress dialogue to fit the timestamps. Natural delivery takes priority. --- FINAL GENERATION LOCK ONE DESI. ONE BEDROOM. ONE CAMERA. ONE CONTINUOUS PHYSICAL FLOW. ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY — BLOCK 5 WARDROBE CHANGE. NO CUTS. NO MORPHING. NO MESHING. NO TELEPORTATION. NO IDENTITY DRIFT. NO OBJECT POP-IN. NO WARDROBE TELEPORTATION. NO DUPLICATION. NO TIME-LAPSE. NO RUSHED MOTION. Block 6 must begin exactly where Block 5 ends, with the exact same Desi, exact same face, exact same jewelry, exact same hairstyle, exact same outfit, exact same environment, and exact same spatial continuity. #AtlasCloud
1:22

"The label just says No Brand" GRWM w Desi Generated on Atlas Cloud Wan 3.0 Prime Esr upscale stitched together on ElevenCreative studio prompt Desi: South Asian woman, mid-20s, warm brown skin with natural, realistic texture — visible pores, subtle natural sheen, no airbrushed smoothness. Expressive dark brown eyes, defined brows, full lips. Long dark wavy hair, undone/messy at the start. No jewelry until the earrings beat. Gold jhumka earrings and thin gold necklace are her fixed accessories once applied. Environment — Desi's Bedroom: Modest, lived-in bedroom, soft neutral-toned walls, single window with sheer curtains, warm diffused morning light with real shadow falloff. Wooden/laminate flooring, small woven area rug. Flows from bed area to vanity/mirror corner to a closet/wardrobe area to a doorway. Bed: simple platform frame, unmade, muted duvet, mismatched pillows, folded throw, nightstand with a plain ceramic mug, analog alarm clock, small lamp. Vanity: wooden dresser, plain oval mirror, small ceramic dish holding her rings/studs/jhumka earrings, a plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" in small black sans-serif text, a plain wooden hairbrush — all visible on the surface from the start. Wardrobe area: simple open wardrobe/hangers with a small handful of plain unbranded clothing already visible. Doorway: simple wooden door, softly lit hallway beyond. Visual style (all blocks): Cinematic realism, not commercial polish. Soft natural film-like grain, warm slightly imperfect color grading true to real morning light. Skin genuinely textured, never smoothed or beauty-filtered. Smooth floating steadicam/gimbal camera movement throughout, cinematic framing sensibility, not raw flat phone footage. Audio style (all blocks): Warm, natural, close-mic room-tone quality, not sterile or studio-clean. Real object-contact sounds, natural room reverb on her voice. No music, no artificial sound effects. Standing negatives (repeat in every block): No AI morphing of any kind — no shifting, warping, or unstable facial features, body proportions, or object shapes. No items suddenly appearing or disappearing in frame — every object must already be visible in its place before she interacts with it. No over-polished or beauty-filtered skin — natural texture and imperfection required throughout. No overly clean, sterile, or commercial visual grade. No duplicate Desi in any frame. No identity drift from block to block. Every product/container shows either no text/logo or exactly the plain "NO BRAND" mark — simple black sans-serif on plain packaging. No recognizable real-world brand names, logos, or trademarked packaging/clothing design anywhere in frame. No extra fingers, fused hands, or distorted anatomy. No text overlays or captions. No music — natural ambient audio only. Mirror reflections physically accurate and consistent; camera never visible in any reflection. No sudden speed changes, no time-lapse compression, no rushed dialogue delivery. BLOCK 1 — [0:00–0:15] The Alarm, Waking, Yawn, First Line Continuity note: Opening block — no prior frame to match. Action: Dark, close frame on Desi's sleeping face, soft warm morning light beginning to catch her skin's natural texture. A phone alarm begins ringing on the nightstand. Hold on her unmoving for a real beat as it rings. Her hand fumbles slowly toward the sound, silences it. She lies still a moment longer, then opens her eyes slowly, squinting at the light. She yawns — full, unhurried, genuine — stretching slightly where she lies. A long pause settles after. Dialogue: (after the yawn, slow, groggy, real pauses) "Okay... (pause) ...so it is way too early for this..." (long pause, slow exhale) "...but let's get ready anyway." Camera: Static-to-slow-float — begins locked close on her face, only beginning the faintest float as she finishes speaking, ending the block just as she starts to shift toward sitting up. Block-specific negatives: The alarm sound must play first, before any dialogue or visible movement. Do not have her wake up abruptly or sit up quickly — the entire block stays in slow, groggy stillness. Do not begin the standing/sitting motion before the final line completes. BLOCK 2 — [0:15–0:30] Five More Minutes + Coffee Stretch Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 1 ended — Desi still lying down, having just finished her line, beginning to shift toward sitting up. Match her position, the room's lighting, and her expression precisely to Block 1's final frame. Action: She sits up fully, stretches with a real, full arms-overhead extension, laughs softly at herself. She reaches for the ceramic mug already present on the nightstand, takes a slow sip, holds it a moment, exhales contentedly. Only after finishing the sip does she swing her legs out and stand, unhurried. Dialogue: "Five more minutes..." (pause, small laugh) "...turned into not five minutes." (beat) "Classic." (pause, after the sip) "Okay." (beat) "...That helps." Camera: Smooth floating steadicam, holding a steady elevated angle through the stretch, following her rise to standing by the block's end. Block-specific negatives: Do not skip or shorten the full stretch. The sip of coffee must complete before she stands — no simultaneous drinking-and-standing. Do not have her rush to her feet; the stand is the final motion of the block, unhurried. BLOCK 3 — [0:30–0:45] Moisturizer Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 2 ended — Desi just risen to standing beside the bed. This block covers her walk to the vanity and the full moisturizer application. Match her position and the room's light to Block 2's final frame. Action: Camera drifts with her as she walks unhurried from the bed to the vanity, arriving at the mirror. The plain glass jar labeled "NO BRAND" is already visible on the vanity surface as she arrives. She unscrews the lid slowly, scoops a small amount, and applies it in full, unhurried circular motions across her face — the entire application shown start to finish within this block. Dialogue: (spoken only once the application is fully finished, near the block's end) "This is like..." (pause) "...the one step I actually never skip." (beat) "Everything else is negotiable." Camera: Floating lateral tracking during the walk, settling into a steady medium shot at the mirror for the application itself. Block-specific negatives: The jar must already be visible on the vanity before she reaches for it — no appearing mid-motion. The application must be shown completing in full before any dialogue begins. Do not rush the walk to the mirror to make room for the application — both get real, unhurried time within the 15 seconds. BLOCK 4 — [0:45–1:00] Hairbrush + Earrings Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 3 ended — Desi standing at the mirror, moisturizer just applied. Match her position and expression to Block 3's final frame. Action: She picks up the plain wooden hairbrush, already resting on the vanity, and brushes out her hair with several full, unhurried strokes, working through it completely. She sets the brush down, then picks up her gold jhumka earrings from the ceramic dish and puts them on one at a time — each fully finished and settled before she begins the second. Dialogue: (mid-brushing) "Yeah, I don't even know what's in that jar anymore." (soft laugh) "The label just says 'No Brand.'" (beat, as she puts in the second earring) "...Works though." Camera: Steady medium-close shot at the mirror, holding through both the brushing and the earrings without cutting away. Block-specific negatives: The hairbrush and earrings must both already be visible on the vanity from the block's start. The first earring must be fully in place before she begins the second — no simultaneous application. Do not shorten the number of brush strokes to save time; let the motion read as genuinely unhurried. BLOCK 5 — [1:00–1:15] Wardrobe Change (Revised: Explicit Detail + Locked Outfit) Continuity note: Opens exactly where Block 4 ended — Desi at the mirror, both earrings now in place. This block covers her moving to the wardrobe area and changing. New Outfit — Locked Reference (carries into Block 6 and any future scenes): A simple, plain white or cream-colored short-sleeve cotton top with a round or slightly scooped neckline, no graphics, no visible branding — soft, everyday fabric with natural draping and slight creasing. Paired with plain straight-leg or slightly relaxed-fit trousers in a muted neutral tone (soft khaki, warm taupe, or dark grey), no visible logos, no stitched branding on pockets or waistband. Simple flat sandals or bare feet, consistent with the casual, staying-home-in-the-morning energy of the piece. This exact combination — top, trousers, footwear — must remain identical through Block 6 and any subsequent generation; treat it as a locked reference image once established. Action, explicitly detailed: Camera follows her as she walks from the vanity toward the wardrobe area, where the clothing has been visible on the rod/hangers since the environment was established — including the specific white/cream top and neutral trousers she will select, already hanging there from the start. She reaches the wardrobe, looks over the few items for a moment, unhurried, and lifts the plain white top and the neutral trousers off their hangers, laying them briefly over her arm or the chair. She turns slightly away from camera or angles herself naturally at the wardrobe (matter-of-fact, not performative), and removes her sleep t-shirt first — pulling it up and off in one unhurried motion, setting it aside on the chair or a nearby surface. She then pulls the plain white top on over her head, arms finding the sleeves naturally, settling the fabric down over her torso with a small adjusting tug at the hem. She then steps out of her sleep bottoms or loungewear pants — sitting briefly on the edge of the chair or bed if needed for balance, one leg at a time — and pulls on the neutral trousers, standing to fasten or settle them at the waist, a small natural motion to smooth them down her hips. Once fully dressed, she does a small self-check — glancing down at the outfit, smoothing the top's hem once more, rolling one sleeve cuff slightly — before turning back toward the mirror. Dialogue: "Okay..." (pause, mid-change) "...let's see." (beat, once dressed, considering the outfit) "...Yeah. That works." Camera: Floating steadicam following her to the wardrobe, holding a respectful medium distance throughout the change — matter-of-fact framing, never a close or lingering angle, treating the change the way an ordinary morning routine would actually look on camera, not stylized or drawn out for effect. Block-specific negatives: The white top and neutral trousers must already be visible hanging in the wardrobe from the start of the block — no appearing only once she reaches for them. The change must be shown as a clear, complete sequence — sleep shirt removed, new top pulled on, sleep bottoms removed, new trousers pulled on — with no skipped steps or instant swaps between states. The change must read as ordinary and unhurried but not sexualized or dwelt upon — medium-distance framing throughout, natural body positioning, nothing posed. No outfit teleporting at any point — every layer change must be visibly performed by her, not implied through a cut or dissolve (there are no cuts in this piece regardless). This exact outfit (plain white/cream short-sleeve top, neutral trousers, sandals or bare feet) is now the locked wardrobe reference for the remainder of the piece — it must not vary in color, cut, or detail in Block 6 or any subsequent scene. BLOCK 6 — 1:15–1:30 FINAL LOOK → WALK OUT CONTINUITY OPEN Block 6 begins immediately from the final frame of Block 5. There is no cut. Desi stands in front of the mirror wearing the exact outfit established in Block 5. Her: white/cream top; neutral trousers; footwear; gold jhumka earrings; gold necklace; hairstyle; makeup; facial features remain exactly consistent. --- 1:15–1:20 FINAL MIRROR CHECK Desi faces the oval mirror. The camera floats gently into position behind/alongside her. She looks at her reflection. A genuine pause. She looks down briefly at the outfit. Smooths the top once. Looks back at herself. A tiny satisfied nod. No exaggerated posing. No influencer-style presentation. She simply looks like someone deciding that she is ready enough to leave. --- 1:20–1:26 WALK TOWARD DOOR Desi turns away from the mirror. The camera smoothly follows. She walks through the bedroom toward the doorway. Her pace remains natural and unhurried. The camera never overtakes her. No whip-pan. No sudden acceleration. No speed ramp. The hallway beyond the doorway is already visible. Morning light spills naturally from the hallway. Dialogue Desi: "Okay." pause "Human." beat "Presentable." pause "Good enough." A small genuine laugh. --- 1:26–1:30 EXIT Desi reaches the doorway. She opens the wooden door. Warm hallway light falls across her. She steps through. The camera continues following her naturally. Just before she disappears completely, she turns her head slightly toward the camera. A genuine late-arriving smile. Dialogue "Alright..." pause "...let's go be a person today." beat "Bye." She exits. The camera remains inside the bedroom. It settles naturally on the empty doorway. Hold for one quiet beat. END. --- MASTER NEGATIVES & CONSTRAINTS BLOCKS 5–6 CONTINUITY One continuous physical camera take. Zero hard cuts. Zero hidden cuts. Zero jump cuts. Zero dissolves. Zero fades between states. Zero time skips. Zero time-lapse. Zero teleportation. Zero duplicated footage. Zero sudden camera repositioning. WHIP-PAN ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY. It occurs exclusively during the wardrobe change in Block 5. The whip-pan must: physically originate from the camera's current position; move through the same bedroom; temporarily obscure Desi; return naturally to the wardrobe area. It must never be used as a disguised cut. No whip-pan during Block 6. --- NO MORPHING / NO MESHING Absolutely no: face morphing; facial meshing; body morphing; wardrobe morphing; texture morphing; object morphing; environmental morphing; frame interpolation artifacts; identity blending; unstable facial geometry; unstable hands; unstable hair; unstable jewelry. Desi must remain the same woman throughout the entire sequence. --- IDENTITY LOCK Do not alter: eyes; eyebrows; nose; lips; jaw; cheekbones; skin tone; face shape; body proportions; age; hair texture; hairline. No identity drift. No alternate version of Desi. No duplicate Desi. No phantom Desi. --- WARDROBE CHANGE The wardrobe change must be physically believable. No: instant outfit swap; outfit teleportation; clothing appearing on her body; clothing disappearing from her body; clothing growing onto her; magical transition; glowing transformation; particle effect; dissolve; morph. The single whip-pan simply gives privacy while maintaining the continuous physical flow of the camera. --- OBJECT CONTINUITY No object may suddenly appear or disappear. The following must remain spatially consistent: wardrobe; clothing; chair; vanity; mirror; jewelry; dresser; plants; rug; door; hallway. The white/cream top and neutral trousers must be visibly hanging in the wardrobe before Desi selects them. --- OUTFIT LOCK Once Desi finishes changing: WHITE/CREAM SHORT-SLEEVE TOP + EXACT NEUTRAL TROUSERS + SAME FOOTWEAR must remain unchanged through the end. No recoloring. No redesign. No different sleeve length. No different trouser cut. No different footwear. No spontaneous accessories. --- MIRROR CONSISTENCY Mirror reflection must be physically accurate at all times. One Desi. Reflection matches her movements exactly. No reflection drift. No alternate face. No duplicated reflection. No delayed reflection. Camera never appears in the mirror. --- ANATOMY No: extra fingers; missing fingers; fused fingers; duplicated hands; malformed hands; warped arms; elongated limbs; distorted torso; unnatural joints; anatomical meshing. --- VISUAL STYLE Cinematic realism. Natural morning light. Natural skin pores and texture. Subtle film-like grain. Slightly imperfect real-world color. No: beauty filter; plastic skin; excessive skin smoothing; glossy commercial lighting; HDR; hyper-clean advertising aesthetic; artificial glow; excessive sharpening. --- AUDIO Continuous natural audio only: footsteps; fabric movement; clothing rustle; jewelry movement; room ambience; natural breathing; door movement; hallway ambience; Desi's natural voice. No music. No cinematic impact sounds. No artificial transition sounds. No sound effect accompanying the whip-pan. --- VOICE Warm low-mid female voice. Natural morning rasp. Close and intimate. Slow. Unhurried. Conversational. Real pauses between phrases. Never sounds like a commercial, narrator, actress, or influencer reading a script. Do not compress dialogue to fit the timestamps. Natural delivery takes priority. --- FINAL GENERATION LOCK ONE DESI. ONE BEDROOM. ONE CAMERA. ONE CONTINUOUS PHYSICAL FLOW. ONE WHIP-PAN ONLY — BLOCK 5 WARDROBE CHANGE. NO CUTS. NO MORPHING. NO MESHING. NO TELEPORTATION. NO IDENTITY DRIFT. NO OBJECT POP-IN. NO WARDROBE TELEPORTATION. NO DUPLICATION. NO TIME-LAPSE. NO RUSHED MOTION. Block 6 must begin exactly where Block 5 ends, with the exact same Desi, exact same face, exact same jewelry, exact same hairstyle, exact same outfit, exact same environment, and exact same spatial continuity. #AtlasCloud

Kayno

17,768 просмотров • 7 дней назад

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 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

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

21,885 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

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 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад