Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

It’s all laughable that Andrew fell for those stats on that MK “designed tracker” image(or probably the one behind it😊🙌🏽) koz’ in reality watsapp simply does not work like that. There is no public watsapp system that allows people outside the company to count how many users have put...

frankbalkazerg1's profile picture

Wayne Frank Ntambi

18,099 subscribers

35,361 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

BEN SHAPIRO: "People like the people in this room believe they have the power to choose and to act in the world, and that they have duties in this world. Duties given to them by God. And then there are the scavengers, and they've been in charge for a while. The scavengers believe that if you fail, it's probably somebody else's fault. They believe that all the systems that allow for success, for merit to thrive, that those systems are broken and must be wholly destroyed. Well, they were on the rise for nearly four years. And now the scavengers are on the run."
0:40

BEN SHAPIRO: "People like the people in this room believe they have the power to choose and to act in the world, and that they have duties in this world. Duties given to them by God. And then there are the scavengers, and they've been in charge for a while. The scavengers believe that if you fail, it's probably somebody else's fault. They believe that all the systems that allow for success, for merit to thrive, that those systems are broken and must be wholly destroyed. Well, they were on the rise for nearly four years. And now the scavengers are on the run."

Charlie Kirk

379,785 views • 1 year ago

The conversation is complicated. Things are not as simple as we hope or want them to be. We are all saddened, frightened and furious about everything. SO much is on the line; people’s lives, everywhere, are on the line. There are people that want to condemn reality, rather than working from within any opposition to change it. To make it safer. The system(s) we have in this world are far beyond flawed. And yet, through horrid strife, unimaginable violence and suffering, and terrible, terrible mistakes, America still, somehow, remains a country that people can hope to be free in. That is worth something. That is worth voting for.
3:21

The conversation is complicated. Things are not as simple as we hope or want them to be. We are all saddened, frightened and furious about everything. SO much is on the line; people’s lives, everywhere, are on the line. There are people that want to condemn reality, rather than working from within any opposition to change it. To make it safer. The system(s) we have in this world are far beyond flawed. And yet, through horrid strife, unimaginable violence and suffering, and terrible, terrible mistakes, America still, somehow, remains a country that people can hope to be free in. That is worth something. That is worth voting for.

Bon Iver

91,472 views • 1 year ago

I have many friends from upper castes who say they have never felt caste discrimination. I tell them it’s obvious, as the system isn’t designed to affect them. For them, it’s like an iceberg—they only see the surface. The real pain and damage caused by the caste discrimination affect not only the Indian people but also our Constitution. The Caste Census is designed to make transparent the hidden discrimination that occurs every single day and has continued for thousands of years. It exists everywhere: in the corporate world, the legal system, the political sphere and every single place. It destroys people’s confidence in the nation every day. : Shri LoP Shri Rahul Gandhi 📍 Telangana
2:35

I have many friends from upper castes who say they have never felt caste discrimination. I tell them it’s obvious, as the system isn’t designed to affect them. For them, it’s like an iceberg—they only see the surface. The real pain and damage caused by the caste discrimination affect not only the Indian people but also our Constitution. The Caste Census is designed to make transparent the hidden discrimination that occurs every single day and has continued for thousands of years. It exists everywhere: in the corporate world, the legal system, the political sphere and every single place. It destroys people’s confidence in the nation every day. : Shri LoP Shri Rahul Gandhi 📍 Telangana

Congress

63,070 views • 1 year ago

I hear so often from the Dommes I work with that they struggle with people online fetichizing them and simply seeing them for how sexy and beautiful they are. They project their fantasies and their desires onto you. That stops immediately once you move the attention from you to them. From 'look at me' to 'I see you'. What does that look like? When you create content, think of them and what this scene or that narrative is evoking. What will they learn from you? What they want is not to passively watch how sexy you are, but for you to train them, to give them instructions, to teach them, to guide them, to be in charge, to command them. This is not being an object but the main subject. The Authority figure. How is your content already doing that. The sexy photos can still be there, they are important to already capture des attention. But what you do with that attention once you have it, is where the power dynamic is established. Positioning yourself as more than a stunning Goddess, but actually a woman who has a voice, opinions, perspective, a philosophy, a way to doing things, teaching them what you like, how you like it, why you like it, already makes them want to be that for you. You hold the attention, you hold the power, so you direct it. And for that, you want them to know you get them and you know what lives within them... that creates the desire for you to be the one exposing it. You instantly build trust. Not because you demanded it, but because you earned it: you showed them you know what you are doing. You have experience, you understand them. They are not told to come see you, they are seduced into it. They desire it. And they will work for it. This will attract better clients (real subs) and instead of you trying to get their attention, they will work to earn yours. If you want to learn more about power dynamics, building a brand as a Pro or the psychology behind BDSM, you can now access all my trainings and classes in one place for a fraction of the cost of The Dominatrix Academy. And you can reinvest the total amount towards the Program. Message me [SECRET] for the details. This offer is not available on my website.
0:51

I hear so often from the Dommes I work with that they struggle with people online fetichizing them and simply seeing them for how sexy and beautiful they are. They project their fantasies and their desires onto you. That stops immediately once you move the attention from you to them. From 'look at me' to 'I see you'. What does that look like? When you create content, think of them and what this scene or that narrative is evoking. What will they learn from you? What they want is not to passively watch how sexy you are, but for you to train them, to give them instructions, to teach them, to guide them, to be in charge, to command them. This is not being an object but the main subject. The Authority figure. How is your content already doing that. The sexy photos can still be there, they are important to already capture des attention. But what you do with that attention once you have it, is where the power dynamic is established. Positioning yourself as more than a stunning Goddess, but actually a woman who has a voice, opinions, perspective, a philosophy, a way to doing things, teaching them what you like, how you like it, why you like it, already makes them want to be that for you. You hold the attention, you hold the power, so you direct it. And for that, you want them to know you get them and you know what lives within them... that creates the desire for you to be the one exposing it. You instantly build trust. Not because you demanded it, but because you earned it: you showed them you know what you are doing. You have experience, you understand them. They are not told to come see you, they are seduced into it. They desire it. And they will work for it. This will attract better clients (real subs) and instead of you trying to get their attention, they will work to earn yours. If you want to learn more about power dynamics, building a brand as a Pro or the psychology behind BDSM, you can now access all my trainings and classes in one place for a fraction of the cost of The Dominatrix Academy. And you can reinvest the total amount towards the Program. Message me [SECRET] for the details. This offer is not available on my website.

Ms. Malissia

15,303 views • 2 months ago

Marc Andreessen reveals the ultimate danger for entrepreneurs trying to lead like the greats. Before you try to run your startup by inserting yourself into every detail, you need to hear this reality check: "The thing you don't get is as follows, which is that... assumes you have somebody like Elon who can hold the entirety of every engineering topic and every business topic in their head all at the same time." "And so when you're sitting there with the 23-year-old engineer and you're working with them to redesign the database architecture or whatever, you actually are like qualified to do that. And that you're qualified to do that not just that one time, but EVERY time." It forces us to ask a tough question about the actual talent pool in tech right now: "This goes right back to the last topic we just talked about, which is like, OK, how many of those people exist who can possibly do that? And, you know, we know the answer is one." But here is where his perspective completely shifts... "I believe the answer is ten or a hundred or a thousand. I don't know if it's a million. I tend to think we have more of those people than we think we do."
1:06

Marc Andreessen reveals the ultimate danger for entrepreneurs trying to lead like the greats. Before you try to run your startup by inserting yourself into every detail, you need to hear this reality check: "The thing you don't get is as follows, which is that... assumes you have somebody like Elon who can hold the entirety of every engineering topic and every business topic in their head all at the same time." "And so when you're sitting there with the 23-year-old engineer and you're working with them to redesign the database architecture or whatever, you actually are like qualified to do that. And that you're qualified to do that not just that one time, but EVERY time." It forces us to ask a tough question about the actual talent pool in tech right now: "This goes right back to the last topic we just talked about, which is like, OK, how many of those people exist who can possibly do that? And, you know, we know the answer is one." But here is where his perspective completely shifts... "I believe the answer is ten or a hundred or a thousand. I don't know if it's a million. I tend to think we have more of those people than we think we do."

Ian Miles Cheong

37,516 views • 3 months ago

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

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

Demetri Kofinas

76,334 views • 6 months ago

.Naval: “The reality is that opportunities have never been more equal than now. Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos have the same iPhone you do. They don’t have some better version of an iPhone. They’re eating food that might be marginally better than yours, but it’s basically the same. You might even have a better diet than them. You probably have more time to go to the gym than them. They’re not immortal, and they’re not going to be—most likely, not at this time scale. So you have more youth than them. You have a lot of advantages over them. The wealth gaps are actually much smaller than people think. A lot of that is due to mass production, which comes from specialization, labor, and capitalism. But it’s very easy to overlook that and agitate—because that gets you higher in the status hierarchy with other monkeys. It makes you look like you’re fighting for noble causes and gives you status, which is really what people are craving these days. They’re craving status, not money or wealth. And status is a zero-sum game. So it’s kind of an evil game to play because there have to be losers for every winner. And the only way to win is by crushing somebody else down.”
1:00

.Naval: “The reality is that opportunities have never been more equal than now. Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos have the same iPhone you do. They don’t have some better version of an iPhone. They’re eating food that might be marginally better than yours, but it’s basically the same. You might even have a better diet than them. You probably have more time to go to the gym than them. They’re not immortal, and they’re not going to be—most likely, not at this time scale. So you have more youth than them. You have a lot of advantages over them. The wealth gaps are actually much smaller than people think. A lot of that is due to mass production, which comes from specialization, labor, and capitalism. But it’s very easy to overlook that and agitate—because that gets you higher in the status hierarchy with other monkeys. It makes you look like you’re fighting for noble causes and gives you status, which is really what people are craving these days. They’re craving status, not money or wealth. And status is a zero-sum game. So it’s kind of an evil game to play because there have to be losers for every winner. And the only way to win is by crushing somebody else down.”

Arjun Khemani

605,493 views • 1 year ago

Trump just released a bizarre statement. Not sure if it makes much sense. "Many say, don't punch down when talking about people like Chris Sununu or sloppy Chris Christie or Ada Hutchinson. I call him Ada, not Asa, because of certain reasons or others, but sometimes it's necessary to talk badly about those that for no reason other than politics speak badly about you. Otherwise, the people that love you don't know whether or not they're for real. Are they saying the truth or not? So sometimes you have to punch down and you have to say what's happening. Otherwise, they won't understand. It's not fair to them. You have to put them in proper perspective. These bad people, you have to put them in their place. People like this are very destructive, and you have to tell the voters what it's all about. Otherwise, why should they be able to understand it? Thank you very much."
1:03

Trump just released a bizarre statement. Not sure if it makes much sense. "Many say, don't punch down when talking about people like Chris Sununu or sloppy Chris Christie or Ada Hutchinson. I call him Ada, not Asa, because of certain reasons or others, but sometimes it's necessary to talk badly about those that for no reason other than politics speak badly about you. Otherwise, the people that love you don't know whether or not they're for real. Are they saying the truth or not? So sometimes you have to punch down and you have to say what's happening. Otherwise, they won't understand. It's not fair to them. You have to put them in proper perspective. These bad people, you have to put them in their place. People like this are very destructive, and you have to tell the voters what it's all about. Otherwise, why should they be able to understand it? Thank you very much."

Ian Miles Cheong

2,028,464 views • 3 years ago

Colonel Jacques Baud: The current Israelis are, in fact, Europeans. They are not from the Middle East. They have never been from the Middle East historically. Never. The Israelis that are currently in Israel are pure Europeans. Pure. They have a small number of Israelis who are Mizrahi, who belong to the Middle Eastern culture and might probably be able to understand the nuance and the subtlety of the diplomatic dialogue or discussion in the Middle East. But those Mizrahi, those Israelis who are the real Jews from Palestine, if I can put it that way, these are not in power. They have even been kept away from power. The power belongs to those Eastern European Jews, which is the Ashkenazi, who have historically had no relationship with the Middle East. And these people have all the features of the Europeans. They have the same arrogance. They have the same approach to problems. They probably have some positive aspects; probably they are more efficient, or things like that, but at the same time they are not able to understand complex triangular relationships. It’s always bipolar. It cannot be more than this. That’s very much who we are as Europeans, and I’ve witnessed that so many times that when you start to have a discussion, a dialogue in the Middle East, Europeans are lost, essentially because, for them, again, we come from a culture where everything is either black or white. For us, the friend of my friend is my friend, but put an enemy in this triangle, and you start to have a problem. For a European, you cannot put the word “enemy” in this triangle. But in the Middle East, you can put the word “enemy” in this triangle, and it still works.
2:40

Colonel Jacques Baud: The current Israelis are, in fact, Europeans. They are not from the Middle East. They have never been from the Middle East historically. Never. The Israelis that are currently in Israel are pure Europeans. Pure. They have a small number of Israelis who are Mizrahi, who belong to the Middle Eastern culture and might probably be able to understand the nuance and the subtlety of the diplomatic dialogue or discussion in the Middle East. But those Mizrahi, those Israelis who are the real Jews from Palestine, if I can put it that way, these are not in power. They have even been kept away from power. The power belongs to those Eastern European Jews, which is the Ashkenazi, who have historically had no relationship with the Middle East. And these people have all the features of the Europeans. They have the same arrogance. They have the same approach to problems. They probably have some positive aspects; probably they are more efficient, or things like that, but at the same time they are not able to understand complex triangular relationships. It’s always bipolar. It cannot be more than this. That’s very much who we are as Europeans, and I’ve witnessed that so many times that when you start to have a discussion, a dialogue in the Middle East, Europeans are lost, essentially because, for them, again, we come from a culture where everything is either black or white. For us, the friend of my friend is my friend, but put an enemy in this triangle, and you start to have a problem. For a European, you cannot put the word “enemy” in this triangle. But in the Middle East, you can put the word “enemy” in this triangle, and it still works.

🅰pocalypsis 🅰pocalypseos 🇷🇺 🇨🇳 🅉

45,252 views • 3 days ago

One thing I hated in Dhurandhar was the same normalization of revealing attire through Yalina's character. The repeated propaganda of saying, "Don't judge a woman based on her attire." These cleavage-showing bodycon outfits are literally designed by Westerners for sexualization and attracting attention. Women put in all that effort and buy these costly outfits for public attention only; it's not like they bought them to wear before going to sleep. There is a huge difference between comfort attire, protective combat or factory gear, and attention-seeking fashion attire. Every attire was designed for a reason; what you wear and the way you wear it are 100% part of your character. No amount of propaganda can change that.
0:36

Sensitive content

One thing I hated in Dhurandhar was the same normalization of revealing attire through Yalina's character. The repeated propaganda of saying, "Don't judge a woman based on her attire." These cleavage-showing bodycon outfits are literally designed by Westerners for sexualization and attracting attention. Women put in all that effort and buy these costly outfits for public attention only; it's not like they bought them to wear before going to sleep. There is a huge difference between comfort attire, protective combat or factory gear, and attention-seeking fashion attire. Every attire was designed for a reason; what you wear and the way you wear it are 100% part of your character. No amount of propaganda can change that.

︎ ︎venom

48,337 views • 1 month ago

🚨 JUST IN: Senate Leader John Thune says he will FORCE a vote on the SAVE America Act, but he can NOT guarantee it will pass because that needs 60 votes "That debate will happen. But like I said, I can guarantee the debate. I can guarantee a vote. I just can't guarantee an outcome." "There are a lot of optimistic views about what Democrats may or may not do. We all know, because we deal with them every day, that the Democrats are not all of a sudden going to decide that this is something they want to be for." "I think you have a lot of optimists out there, and I appreciate that, and a lot of passion and energy behind getting an outcome here." "But getting an outcome would require Democrat votes." "And, you know, we'll give them a chance. Like I said, they'll have that opportunity to vote one way or the other on this. But I would be very, very surprised."
1:03

🚨 JUST IN: Senate Leader John Thune says he will FORCE a vote on the SAVE America Act, but he can NOT guarantee it will pass because that needs 60 votes "That debate will happen. But like I said, I can guarantee the debate. I can guarantee a vote. I just can't guarantee an outcome." "There are a lot of optimistic views about what Democrats may or may not do. We all know, because we deal with them every day, that the Democrats are not all of a sudden going to decide that this is something they want to be for." "I think you have a lot of optimists out there, and I appreciate that, and a lot of passion and energy behind getting an outcome here." "But getting an outcome would require Democrat votes." "And, you know, we'll give them a chance. Like I said, they'll have that opportunity to vote one way or the other on this. But I would be very, very surprised."

Eric Daugherty

304,495 views • 4 months ago

Joe Rogan and Jesse Michels just revealed the evidence that survivors from Atlantis might have created a “breakaway civilization” 11,000 years ago. Rogan: “It’s not a coincidence that these cultures that all have this flood myth all align with the Younger Dryas Impact Theory timeline.” “It’s the same timeline as the ending of Atlantis.” “They’ve got core samples that show a large amount of iridium. They know that iridium is rare on Earth, but very common in space.” “They know that there’s a comet storm that comes by, I think it’s every November and every June.” “They know that it caused Tunguska.” “So the idea that that happened in a horrible way 11,000+ years ago, it’s not outrageous at all.” Michels: “Hal Puthoff has written a paper on ultraterrestrials.” “Beings that could’ve died off in a cataclysm, maybe there were some remnant survivors.” “Maybe those survivors have underwater bases, bases on the Moon.” “They have advanced technology leftover from that Atlantean period.” Rogan: “Like a breakaway civilization.” “You always hear … the elites all have a bunker somewhere.” “Maybe that was their version of the elites have a bunker.” Joe Rogan Jesse Michels
2:03

Joe Rogan and Jesse Michels just revealed the evidence that survivors from Atlantis might have created a “breakaway civilization” 11,000 years ago. Rogan: “It’s not a coincidence that these cultures that all have this flood myth all align with the Younger Dryas Impact Theory timeline.” “It’s the same timeline as the ending of Atlantis.” “They’ve got core samples that show a large amount of iridium. They know that iridium is rare on Earth, but very common in space.” “They know that there’s a comet storm that comes by, I think it’s every November and every June.” “They know that it caused Tunguska.” “So the idea that that happened in a horrible way 11,000+ years ago, it’s not outrageous at all.” Michels: “Hal Puthoff has written a paper on ultraterrestrials.” “Beings that could’ve died off in a cataclysm, maybe there were some remnant survivors.” “Maybe those survivors have underwater bases, bases on the Moon.” “They have advanced technology leftover from that Atlantean period.” Rogan: “Like a breakaway civilization.” “You always hear … the elites all have a bunker somewhere.” “Maybe that was their version of the elites have a bunker.” Joe Rogan Jesse Michels

Holden Culotta

160,126 views • 7 months ago

🚨🇺🇸 BREAKING — Trump Admits Socialism Works "I have to say, I respect China, because it’s incredible that with a system that, in theory, shouldn’t work—you know, we go to school, we go to the best business schools, we do well in those schools, and we read about free entrepreneurship, and we read about all these different things— But if you look at China, how well they do, how much they produce. I mean, they produce so many cars that they actually have competitions over who can produce the fewest cars because they have so many cars. You have to have great respect for China for the work they do. Whether you like them or not, you have to respect them."
1:17

🚨🇺🇸 BREAKING — Trump Admits Socialism Works "I have to say, I respect China, because it’s incredible that with a system that, in theory, shouldn’t work—you know, we go to school, we go to the best business schools, we do well in those schools, and we read about free entrepreneurship, and we read about all these different things— But if you look at China, how well they do, how much they produce. I mean, they produce so many cars that they actually have competitions over who can produce the fewest cars because they have so many cars. You have to have great respect for China for the work they do. Whether you like them or not, you have to respect them."

Pamphlets

1,568,258 views • 3 months ago

The way Tom and Zendaya speak about each other says more than a thousand perfectly curated couple photos ever could. In a world where relationships seem to be built for headlines, attention, and social media validation, these two somehow make love look effortless, genuine, and real. What makes people so obsessed with them isn’t just their fame, it’s the way they constantly show respect, admiration, and support for each other without turning their relationship into a public spectacle. Every interview, every mention, every little interaction feels like a reminder that real love isn’t always loud; sometimes it’s found in the way someone talks about you when you’re not in the room. And maybe this is the controversial part: so many modern relationships could learn from that. Not every relationship needs grand gestures for the internet. Sometimes the strongest love is simply being each other’s biggest supporter, protector, and safe place. Whether you think they’re relationship goals or not, it’s hard to ignore the genuine care they seem to have for one another. In an era where people fall in love with attention, they seem to have fallen in love with each other.
2:14

The way Tom and Zendaya speak about each other says more than a thousand perfectly curated couple photos ever could. In a world where relationships seem to be built for headlines, attention, and social media validation, these two somehow make love look effortless, genuine, and real. What makes people so obsessed with them isn’t just their fame, it’s the way they constantly show respect, admiration, and support for each other without turning their relationship into a public spectacle. Every interview, every mention, every little interaction feels like a reminder that real love isn’t always loud; sometimes it’s found in the way someone talks about you when you’re not in the room. And maybe this is the controversial part: so many modern relationships could learn from that. Not every relationship needs grand gestures for the internet. Sometimes the strongest love is simply being each other’s biggest supporter, protector, and safe place. Whether you think they’re relationship goals or not, it’s hard to ignore the genuine care they seem to have for one another. In an era where people fall in love with attention, they seem to have fallen in love with each other.

Deherico

94,849 views • 1 month ago

Me: I discuss in the book—it refers to the state where I know something, you know something, I know that you know it, you know that I know it, I know that you know that I know it, and so on ad infinitum. So it differs a bit from the conventional usage, which just refers to something that everyone knows. Here, everyone has to know that everyone knows. Times Radio Interviewer (Daniel Finkelstein Daniel Finkelstein): Can I use this with reference to the interview that I did yesterday with my brother? My brother’s a professor at City University; he’s president of the university, and there’s a campaign at the moment going on against one of their professors who was in the Israeli Defense Forces in the 1980s. We were having a discussion about how the university was standing up for the free speech of its staff, and I’d begun to wonder, as I went home reading your book on the tube, whether I’d made a big mistake—because the protest against this professor is really just a coordination exercise, isn’t it? And maybe I’d aided it by talking about it. Me: Oh yes—protests are coordination exercises. They’re designed to make private knowledge common knowledge. So, in a repressive regime, everyone may know that they despise the government, but because criticism of the government is punished, people might keep their opinions to themselves, with a result that they really don’t know what their fellow citizens think. Each one might think that they’re the only ones that are disgruntled, and so they can’t fear standing up to—they fear standing up to oppose the regime, because they can be picked off one at a time. If everyone were to protest at once, no government has the firepower to intimidate all its citizens at once. In a public protest, people can see other people there, and they know that the people there see other people there, and that can give them the strength and numbers to oppose the regime—sometimes by literally storming the palace, or sometimes just bringing the machinery of the state to a halt through work stoppages. But the crucial thing is that they are coordinated. They can only be coordinated if everyone knows that everyone knows that they hate the regime. Daniel Finkelstein: I suppose that social media is making people—is increasing the stock of common knowledge. We’re all much more aware of what other people like us, in particular like us, know, and we also know that other people know it, and so on, as you put it, and that makes people have more common knowledge. It’s not making us happier though; maybe we’d be better with less common knowledge? Me: Social media are making us more connected within certain circles—that is, those who are receiving the same texts and feeds that we are. It reduces the pool of, or shrinks the largest pool of common knowledge, namely the whole country, which may have been accessible in a day in which, say, in the United States there were three networks, or in Britain everyone was listening to the BBC. And yes, it probably doesn’t make us as happy, because when everything is public, it means that your reputation is on the line for anything you say or do. It means that since social media allow us to generate common knowledge, not just receive it like in the old days, it means that attacks on people’s reputation can be common knowledge, which means that it’s all the more painful for people on the receiving end of the attack. It may have something to do with the fact that in certain demographics—especially young people whose lives increasingly are online—that there’s that much more social competition, opportunities for gossip and ostracism and demeaning comments, and so on. When Everyone Knows That Everyone Knows . . .: Common Knowledge and the Mysteries of Money, Power, and Everyday Life:
3:39

Me: I discuss in the book—it refers to the state where I know something, you know something, I know that you know it, you know that I know it, I know that you know that I know it, and so on ad infinitum. So it differs a bit from the conventional usage, which just refers to something that everyone knows. Here, everyone has to know that everyone knows. Times Radio Interviewer (Daniel Finkelstein Daniel Finkelstein): Can I use this with reference to the interview that I did yesterday with my brother? My brother’s a professor at City University; he’s president of the university, and there’s a campaign at the moment going on against one of their professors who was in the Israeli Defense Forces in the 1980s. We were having a discussion about how the university was standing up for the free speech of its staff, and I’d begun to wonder, as I went home reading your book on the tube, whether I’d made a big mistake—because the protest against this professor is really just a coordination exercise, isn’t it? And maybe I’d aided it by talking about it. Me: Oh yes—protests are coordination exercises. They’re designed to make private knowledge common knowledge. So, in a repressive regime, everyone may know that they despise the government, but because criticism of the government is punished, people might keep their opinions to themselves, with a result that they really don’t know what their fellow citizens think. Each one might think that they’re the only ones that are disgruntled, and so they can’t fear standing up to—they fear standing up to oppose the regime, because they can be picked off one at a time. If everyone were to protest at once, no government has the firepower to intimidate all its citizens at once. In a public protest, people can see other people there, and they know that the people there see other people there, and that can give them the strength and numbers to oppose the regime—sometimes by literally storming the palace, or sometimes just bringing the machinery of the state to a halt through work stoppages. But the crucial thing is that they are coordinated. They can only be coordinated if everyone knows that everyone knows that they hate the regime. Daniel Finkelstein: I suppose that social media is making people—is increasing the stock of common knowledge. We’re all much more aware of what other people like us, in particular like us, know, and we also know that other people know it, and so on, as you put it, and that makes people have more common knowledge. It’s not making us happier though; maybe we’d be better with less common knowledge? Me: Social media are making us more connected within certain circles—that is, those who are receiving the same texts and feeds that we are. It reduces the pool of, or shrinks the largest pool of common knowledge, namely the whole country, which may have been accessible in a day in which, say, in the United States there were three networks, or in Britain everyone was listening to the BBC. And yes, it probably doesn’t make us as happy, because when everything is public, it means that your reputation is on the line for anything you say or do. It means that since social media allow us to generate common knowledge, not just receive it like in the old days, it means that attacks on people’s reputation can be common knowledge, which means that it’s all the more painful for people on the receiving end of the attack. It may have something to do with the fact that in certain demographics—especially young people whose lives increasingly are online—that there’s that much more social competition, opportunities for gossip and ostracism and demeaning comments, and so on. When Everyone Knows That Everyone Knows . . .: Common Knowledge and the Mysteries of Money, Power, and Everyday Life:

Steven Pinker

21,547 views • 6 months ago

Mr. Yuval Levin, Senior Fellow American Enterprise Institute, reflects on the role of Congress: "If we're going to have a politics in which deliberation plays a central role, we have to have a politics in which Congress plays a central role. That part can only be played by a plural institution that is both representative and deliberative, and that is what Congress is designed to be." … "We are living in a political moment where the deepest differences do not get worked out, and we've persuaded ourselves that this is because we're polarized, or it's because we're divided, or it's social media. We're not more polarized than the America of the late eighteenth century. We're not more divided than the America of the mid-nineteenth century. These technologies have not changed human nature or the character of politics. The core institution of our system now does not want the role it is assigned, and that is what has to change."
1:16

Mr. Yuval Levin, Senior Fellow American Enterprise Institute, reflects on the role of Congress: "If we're going to have a politics in which deliberation plays a central role, we have to have a politics in which Congress plays a central role. That part can only be played by a plural institution that is both representative and deliberative, and that is what Congress is designed to be." … "We are living in a political moment where the deepest differences do not get worked out, and we've persuaded ourselves that this is because we're polarized, or it's because we're divided, or it's social media. We're not more polarized than the America of the late eighteenth century. We're not more divided than the America of the mid-nineteenth century. These technologies have not changed human nature or the character of politics. The core institution of our system now does not want the role it is assigned, and that is what has to change."

Federalist Society

13,045 views • 2 months ago

There is a major concern about Data Centers that are using closed loop cooling systems that’s not being talked about There are a lot of chemicals being put into the water used in these systems. That water has to be flushed out every couple years Whistleblowers say that chemical water is being pushed into our streams and waterways and may have extremely limited cleaning requirements depending on state “I'm getting whistleblowers on the inside saying that they're taking all that waste and they're just running it down into the sewers. They're wanting to go to more closed cooling systems, and in those closed cooling systems, you still are gonna be using chemicals. There's no regulations about every 2 years when you have to clean out a cooling closed system, where are you gonna throw all of those chemicals?” “Taking polluted water and running it through system and dumping it into a river and it flows downstream, that will have a natural dilution, would resolve the issue, and it's not. Even if it's a closed cooling system, that water that's recycling in there, eventually they have to clean those systems. They have to release that water. And are there any regulations to look at what chemicals aren't in that water before we release it into the environment and just create another pollution issue?” “Right now it's a free-for-all out there.” It’s not a complete free for all, it depends on the states and general federal regulations. Discharges from cleaning, blowdown or maintenance are subject to environmental rules There should be compliance reporting but whistleblowers are saying none of this is being followed, they’re saying it’s a “free for all” and the data centers are just planning on the chemicals being diluted as they flow down our waterways We need investigations
3:19

There is a major concern about Data Centers that are using closed loop cooling systems that’s not being talked about There are a lot of chemicals being put into the water used in these systems. That water has to be flushed out every couple years Whistleblowers say that chemical water is being pushed into our streams and waterways and may have extremely limited cleaning requirements depending on state “I'm getting whistleblowers on the inside saying that they're taking all that waste and they're just running it down into the sewers. They're wanting to go to more closed cooling systems, and in those closed cooling systems, you still are gonna be using chemicals. There's no regulations about every 2 years when you have to clean out a cooling closed system, where are you gonna throw all of those chemicals?” “Taking polluted water and running it through system and dumping it into a river and it flows downstream, that will have a natural dilution, would resolve the issue, and it's not. Even if it's a closed cooling system, that water that's recycling in there, eventually they have to clean those systems. They have to release that water. And are there any regulations to look at what chemicals aren't in that water before we release it into the environment and just create another pollution issue?” “Right now it's a free-for-all out there.” It’s not a complete free for all, it depends on the states and general federal regulations. Discharges from cleaning, blowdown or maintenance are subject to environmental rules There should be compliance reporting but whistleblowers are saying none of this is being followed, they’re saying it’s a “free for all” and the data centers are just planning on the chemicals being diluted as they flow down our waterways We need investigations

Wall Street Apes

68,062 views • 3 days ago

Andrew Gallimore: "Some people are getting banned from the DMT realm" "Mantis beings are even punching people in the face" He told AJ from The Why Files how one person described a mantis being punching a user in the face right as they entered the space. The punch was felt and the entire experience ended instantly. The user snapped back to baseline consciousness with the effects just gone like that. People report getting a big X in their field of vision that says no entry. Or an entity that wags its finger and says no no no. Or a clear message that you are not welcome here and we are not letting you in. This is called a lockout. It can last for months or years. Unlike normal tolerance that builds gradually this functions like an on off switch with no straightforward pharmacological explanation. These consistent accounts from regular DMT users continue to raise deep questions about what is actually encountered in that space.
1:30

Andrew Gallimore: "Some people are getting banned from the DMT realm" "Mantis beings are even punching people in the face" He told AJ from The Why Files how one person described a mantis being punching a user in the face right as they entered the space. The punch was felt and the entire experience ended instantly. The user snapped back to baseline consciousness with the effects just gone like that. People report getting a big X in their field of vision that says no entry. Or an entity that wags its finger and says no no no. Or a clear message that you are not welcome here and we are not letting you in. This is called a lockout. It can last for months or years. Unlike normal tolerance that builds gradually this functions like an on off switch with no straightforward pharmacological explanation. These consistent accounts from regular DMT users continue to raise deep questions about what is actually encountered in that space.

Interstellar

247,428 views • 1 month ago

Elon Musk was asked what happens to people when the machines no longer need them. He didn’t soften it. Musk: “There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. These are not things I wish would happen. They probably will.” Sit with that second sentence. He is not celebrating. He is not selling a vision. He is telling you what he believes is inevitable and admitting he wishes it weren’t. That is not optimism. That is a confession. Most people are still arguing over whether this is real. Whether it’s their job or someone else’s. Whether the timeline is years away or decades. Musk isn’t arguing. He resolved it. And it bothers him. Musk: “I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income. I don’t think we’re going to have a choice.” Not a political position. Not a utopian proposal. A concession. We are building something so capable that human labor stops being a required input to the economy. The machine does not need rest. It does not need a salary. It does not call in sick. It does not ask for a raise. And it improves every single month. The jobs that feel safe right now are not safe because they are irreplaceable. They feel safe because the technology hasn’t fully arrived yet. It’s arriving. Musk: “How do people then have meaning? If there’s not a need for your labor, what’s the meaning? Do you feel useless?” He said that is the harder problem. Not the economics. Not the policy. Not how you fund UBI or make it hold. The harder problem is what happens to a person who built their entire identity around being needed. That is most people. You were trained from childhood to believe your value is what you produce. That your worth is what you earn. That rest is something you survive the week to reach, not something you deserve simply by existing. When the machine removes the need for your labor, that belief does not update. It breaks. The people least prepared for that moment are the ones who worked the hardest. The ones who took the most pride in being indispensable. The ones who made work the whole answer. Losing the job is survivable. Losing the reason to get up is not. That is what Musk is actually asking. Not how do we pay people. How do we build a world where people still feel like they matter when the economy no longer needs them. Nobody in power is seriously working on that answer. The machine didn’t wait.
1:16

Elon Musk was asked what happens to people when the machines no longer need them. He didn’t soften it. Musk: “There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. These are not things I wish would happen. They probably will.” Sit with that second sentence. He is not celebrating. He is not selling a vision. He is telling you what he believes is inevitable and admitting he wishes it weren’t. That is not optimism. That is a confession. Most people are still arguing over whether this is real. Whether it’s their job or someone else’s. Whether the timeline is years away or decades. Musk isn’t arguing. He resolved it. And it bothers him. Musk: “I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income. I don’t think we’re going to have a choice.” Not a political position. Not a utopian proposal. A concession. We are building something so capable that human labor stops being a required input to the economy. The machine does not need rest. It does not need a salary. It does not call in sick. It does not ask for a raise. And it improves every single month. The jobs that feel safe right now are not safe because they are irreplaceable. They feel safe because the technology hasn’t fully arrived yet. It’s arriving. Musk: “How do people then have meaning? If there’s not a need for your labor, what’s the meaning? Do you feel useless?” He said that is the harder problem. Not the economics. Not the policy. Not how you fund UBI or make it hold. The harder problem is what happens to a person who built their entire identity around being needed. That is most people. You were trained from childhood to believe your value is what you produce. That your worth is what you earn. That rest is something you survive the week to reach, not something you deserve simply by existing. When the machine removes the need for your labor, that belief does not update. It breaks. The people least prepared for that moment are the ones who worked the hardest. The ones who took the most pride in being indispensable. The ones who made work the whole answer. Losing the job is survivable. Losing the reason to get up is not. That is what Musk is actually asking. Not how do we pay people. How do we build a world where people still feel like they matter when the economy no longer needs them. Nobody in power is seriously working on that answer. The machine didn’t wait.

Dustin

247,083 views • 3 months ago