Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Just realized I never shared this one here: A while ago I was interested in seeing if we could make an 'engine' for retro consoles, so, since NESMaker already exists and I've always been a fan of the NeoGeo, I dabbled with creating a 'NGMaker'. The idea would be...

thomasmahler's profile picture

thomasmahler

35,242 subscribers

23,109 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

Pi was built when there were already agent harnesses around. Here’s why Mario Zechner(Mario Zechner), found them suboptimal and built Pi, a minimalist self-modifying agent: #1 - Mario initially was a believer in Claude Code: "I was a believer in Claude code because they were the first that packaged agentic search up in a really compelling package. And at the time that fit my workflow really well. Everything around the LLM was kind of nice and tidy and easy to understand. I was super happy. I was proselytising Claude code." #2 - Reverse engineering Claude Code highlighted the degradation that Mario felt as a user: "I personally like simple tools that are stable and that I can rely on. Even if they have non-deterministic parts, all the deterministic parts should be as stable as possible. That was just not the experience with Claude Code around summer 2025. They would take away your control of the context. They would inject stuff behind your back, which is bad. Then, your workflows stopped working because there's now a system reminder that you don't even see in the UI that would modify the behaviour of the model. They would also do this to the system prompt. I built a little service where I can track the progression or evolution of the system, prompt and tool definitions and, with every release, it was messing with stuff. That just messed with my workflows and I don't appreciate that." #3 - PI was built with an appreciation for simple and reliable tools: "If I commit to a development tool, I want it to be a stable, reliable thing like a hammer. I don't want my hammer to break a different spot every day. That's terrible. We need somebody who goes the full velocity kind of way. But I don't want to work with a tool like that."
2:54

Pi was built when there were already agent harnesses around. Here’s why Mario Zechner(Mario Zechner), found them suboptimal and built Pi, a minimalist self-modifying agent: #1 - Mario initially was a believer in Claude Code: "I was a believer in Claude code because they were the first that packaged agentic search up in a really compelling package. And at the time that fit my workflow really well. Everything around the LLM was kind of nice and tidy and easy to understand. I was super happy. I was proselytising Claude code." #2 - Reverse engineering Claude Code highlighted the degradation that Mario felt as a user: "I personally like simple tools that are stable and that I can rely on. Even if they have non-deterministic parts, all the deterministic parts should be as stable as possible. That was just not the experience with Claude Code around summer 2025. They would take away your control of the context. They would inject stuff behind your back, which is bad. Then, your workflows stopped working because there's now a system reminder that you don't even see in the UI that would modify the behaviour of the model. They would also do this to the system prompt. I built a little service where I can track the progression or evolution of the system, prompt and tool definitions and, with every release, it was messing with stuff. That just messed with my workflows and I don't appreciate that." #3 - PI was built with an appreciation for simple and reliable tools: "If I commit to a development tool, I want it to be a stable, reliable thing like a hammer. I don't want my hammer to break a different spot every day. That's terrible. We need somebody who goes the full velocity kind of way. But I don't want to work with a tool like that."

The Pragmatic Engineer

62,825 views • 2 months ago

Blake Edwards on the conditions he laid out before accepting to direct "A Shot in the Dark" (1964): "'A Shot in the Dark' (1964) is nothing like Marcel Archard’s play, that’s for a start. I was asked to save the situation. They had quite a bit of money involved in this project. Peter Sellers was threatening to pull out because he didn’t like the screenplay. He said that the only way he would continue with the project would be if I took it over. I said that the only way I could possibly take it over, under such emergency conditions, would be that I would not be obliged to do anything like Archard’s play because a) I didn’t like it, b) I thought it was not a motion picture and c) I wasn’t ready to make a movie at that point. So they asked me what I wanted to do because the picture had to start in something like four weeks. I said that if they wanted me to save them, I’d have to take something with which I was familiar to begin with. I was familiar with the character of Clouseau. I needed a detective, somebody to solve a murder. I couldn’t throw the whole thing out. I had to use the idea that the maid was accused of killing the chaffeur and this had to be solved. So I thought that Peter Sellers was just the natural thing and that now I was going to try to be as broad with the character as I could be. “How far can I go now in terms of Inspector Clouseau?” I wrote the screenplay and was on the stage in four weeks with it. Fortunately, it turned out to be a reasonably funny movie. It proved something for me—that if a gag is well-designed you can pull it off." (Blake Edwards' interview with Jean-Francois Hauduroy, Cahiers du cinéma, 1966) P.S: On this 62 years ago, "A Shot in the Dark" (1964) premiered in New York City, USA.
1:23

Blake Edwards on the conditions he laid out before accepting to direct "A Shot in the Dark" (1964): "'A Shot in the Dark' (1964) is nothing like Marcel Archard’s play, that’s for a start. I was asked to save the situation. They had quite a bit of money involved in this project. Peter Sellers was threatening to pull out because he didn’t like the screenplay. He said that the only way he would continue with the project would be if I took it over. I said that the only way I could possibly take it over, under such emergency conditions, would be that I would not be obliged to do anything like Archard’s play because a) I didn’t like it, b) I thought it was not a motion picture and c) I wasn’t ready to make a movie at that point. So they asked me what I wanted to do because the picture had to start in something like four weeks. I said that if they wanted me to save them, I’d have to take something with which I was familiar to begin with. I was familiar with the character of Clouseau. I needed a detective, somebody to solve a murder. I couldn’t throw the whole thing out. I had to use the idea that the maid was accused of killing the chaffeur and this had to be solved. So I thought that Peter Sellers was just the natural thing and that now I was going to try to be as broad with the character as I could be. “How far can I go now in terms of Inspector Clouseau?” I wrote the screenplay and was on the stage in four weeks with it. Fortunately, it turned out to be a reasonably funny movie. It proved something for me—that if a gag is well-designed you can pull it off." (Blake Edwards' interview with Jean-Francois Hauduroy, Cahiers du cinéma, 1966) P.S: On this 62 years ago, "A Shot in the Dark" (1964) premiered in New York City, USA.

DepressedBergman

20,299 views • 15 days ago

“In the wake of ‘The Boys,’ I signed a deal with Amazon. They wanted to develop something with me in mind, so I had a few meetings with different writers and different kinds of takes for shows. When I met Derek Haas, who created #Countdown and has written all 13 scripts, I just clicked with him immediately. He and I actually grew up in the same town; we went to neighboring high schools, so we had a lot in common right off the bat. But he's just a really great storyteller, and he comes from a long line of writing really kind of intense stuff. And so the character that he created, I just felt like I could tell that story in the world that he was also creating. That led to more meetings, and then that led to some outlines. I got to read the first script, and I just really liked where it was going. I liked the kind of world that he was setting it in, and I got excited about it. I was fortunate enough to be in a position to do that and be there from the beginning, the genesis of it all, 'cause that's not normal. For most actors, everything is kind of already cooked, and then they come in - they get cast in a role that's already happening. I was kind of, not involved creatively, but I was already on the train from the beginning in the station, so that was nice. And there are some twists and turns with this show; there are some big reveals, so to speak. So I'm excited for you guys. I'm excited to get it done - we're about halfway done with the season right now. I think they're shooting for June’s, probably, release, next summer, and I'm excited to see what you guys think and to see it once it's on its feet.” Jensen Ackles #SPNOrlando #SPNOrl
2:23

“In the wake of ‘The Boys,’ I signed a deal with Amazon. They wanted to develop something with me in mind, so I had a few meetings with different writers and different kinds of takes for shows. When I met Derek Haas, who created #Countdown and has written all 13 scripts, I just clicked with him immediately. He and I actually grew up in the same town; we went to neighboring high schools, so we had a lot in common right off the bat. But he's just a really great storyteller, and he comes from a long line of writing really kind of intense stuff. And so the character that he created, I just felt like I could tell that story in the world that he was also creating. That led to more meetings, and then that led to some outlines. I got to read the first script, and I just really liked where it was going. I liked the kind of world that he was setting it in, and I got excited about it. I was fortunate enough to be in a position to do that and be there from the beginning, the genesis of it all, 'cause that's not normal. For most actors, everything is kind of already cooked, and then they come in - they get cast in a role that's already happening. I was kind of, not involved creatively, but I was already on the train from the beginning in the station, so that was nice. And there are some twists and turns with this show; there are some big reveals, so to speak. So I'm excited for you guys. I'm excited to get it done - we're about halfway done with the season right now. I think they're shooting for June’s, probably, release, next summer, and I'm excited to see what you guys think and to see it once it's on its feet.” Jensen Ackles #SPNOrlando #SPNOrl

Jensen Ackles Newsroom

26,830 views • 1 year ago

👽🔥 New Dylan - Biologics🔥👽 "There's things that I knew that these people were aware of, but even they would not say. One of those being biologics." ~DB "The agreement was that, if they died, that I run with it and just blow the whole thing up." ~DB Firsthand witnesses to the Legacy program, "would never come forward in a million years unless they were gonna die." ~DB "When I was still in government...I brought the people who worked on [the biological analysis of non-human bodies] to The Hill." ~Grusch ~ Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Did you physically see photos? Did you physically see these documents?" Dylan Borland: "No, but because of how much was given to me in relay that the individuals that had relayed it, they were doing so because they were genuinely concerned for their life, because their careers were taken, their houses were broken into. I mean, computers taken, mailboxes gone through. And again, they knew what I was going through at this time. They had given me enough information, and the agreement was that, if they died, that I run with it and just blow the whole thing up." Corbell: "So he's got his firsthand experience of this tech, but then this is something George and I hear a lot. Which is, in the Legacy, when you're kind of put into the bad camp - you know, you're under scrutiny now - that there are these people that are threatening you, and you do feel afraid for your life. And we'll get to it, but there are some things that occurred to you as this gets kind of deeper and deeper with what's happening. "But just to be clear: So you're in a place where there's some sort of purgatory going on. Everybody has clearance, but they're in this sort of purgatory. You're in this sort of purgatory?" Borland: "A few of us, yep." Corbell: "And then, people directly involved in the Legacy program are afraid for their lives, so they're telling you so that at least somebody at their level can take that information if something bad happens to them?" Borland: "I think it was definitely that, but it was also, this is such an isolating, lonely experience, especially for young people to be exposed to the reality of this. If you already don't have the acknowledgement that it's a possibility, like if you're...I don't want to say closed minded. If you're an average Joe Blow going through life, and then all of a sudden this pops up on your radar, and you're seeing physical proof of it, you probably take a step back and go, 'whoa.' So you have that aspect, then these same people have that aspect of it, and they also have the aspect of their government destroying them." (In other words, people like us would be excited to see proof of what we all suspect. But someone new to the topic might freak out a bit.) George Knapp: "So they are going through the same thing you are." Borland "Exactly." Knapp: "Their clearances are in limbo, home break ins, threats..." Borland: "When I come into contact with these people, they had had to resign from their government position and take a contracting job for less money. They were, basically, blacklisted for six months. The only reason they ended up getting a job was because somebody on the Legacy program had hooked them up after six months. And they ended up where I was at, and they heard me talking all this stuff, and they're like, 'Oh, you ended up here too, buddy. So, uh, what the hell is going on here?' Knapp: "It's like the island of bad toys or something like that." Borland: "Yeah." Knapp: "You know, put them all in one basket." Borland: "After I saw what I saw, and I've experienced what I've experienced, I kind of...I think most of us have, taken the delve into all of this material (points toward a bookshelf full of what appear to be UFO books). And you're like, 'I know this is true, I know this is true, I know this is true. Who else is saying these true things? Who else is relaying information I know to be true, to try and make sense of your own life?' "Um, they were aware of what I was talking about. I don't know the capacity in which they were briefed in. There's things that I knew that these people were aware of, but even they would not say. Um, one of those being biologics." ~~~ (This is the best anecdote we have about government officials being briefed on bodies.) Joe Rogan: "When it comes to these...actual entities...do we have an understanding of how many of them we're talking about, and the variety of them?" Grusch: "There is a variety and we have a certain number of (laughs) different things... I talked to people who were familiar with the biological analysis of everything. So we have some idea, not a complete picture because it's like, you know, looking at it, it's like, well I don't even understand the physiology at all. It's like, what the heck? It's like, way different, right? So..." Rogan: "Is there a description of this physiology?" Grusch: "Yeah, no, I was in the room when uhhh... I gotta be careful, I don't wanna... I was in Washington, DC with a very number of senior people that work for members of Congress (Senate staffers seems like a safe bet ~Joe). Put it that way. When I was still in government. And I brought the people who worked on that stuff to The Hill. And this is why the members were so confident to put out the Schumer amendment and stuff. And, I was like, 'Please explain.' And they went into all those details and stuff. And I remember (laughs) some of the professional staff members were like, 'Whoa.' Like they were like, in G-Loc, right? Cause, I mean, and like, a total world bubble got burst right there for a lot of people." Source, with video... ~Back to Dylan~ Knapp: "You think there's a storehouse of that information that anybody would have put something away in case something bad happened to them? And do you know what happened to these people?" Borland: "You know the ones that I know still continue in the government. Um, I think they continue in classified-operations programs." Knapp: "They're not coming forward." Borland: "They would never come forward in a million years unless they were gonna die. And that's...it really sucks for me coming forward, because I only came forward because I sincerely believed they were going to die. Sucks."
3:47

👽🔥 New Dylan - Biologics🔥👽 "There's things that I knew that these people were aware of, but even they would not say. One of those being biologics." ~DB "The agreement was that, if they died, that I run with it and just blow the whole thing up." ~DB Firsthand witnesses to the Legacy program, "would never come forward in a million years unless they were gonna die." ~DB "When I was still in government...I brought the people who worked on [the biological analysis of non-human bodies] to The Hill." ~Grusch ~ Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Did you physically see photos? Did you physically see these documents?" Dylan Borland: "No, but because of how much was given to me in relay that the individuals that had relayed it, they were doing so because they were genuinely concerned for their life, because their careers were taken, their houses were broken into. I mean, computers taken, mailboxes gone through. And again, they knew what I was going through at this time. They had given me enough information, and the agreement was that, if they died, that I run with it and just blow the whole thing up." Corbell: "So he's got his firsthand experience of this tech, but then this is something George and I hear a lot. Which is, in the Legacy, when you're kind of put into the bad camp - you know, you're under scrutiny now - that there are these people that are threatening you, and you do feel afraid for your life. And we'll get to it, but there are some things that occurred to you as this gets kind of deeper and deeper with what's happening. "But just to be clear: So you're in a place where there's some sort of purgatory going on. Everybody has clearance, but they're in this sort of purgatory. You're in this sort of purgatory?" Borland: "A few of us, yep." Corbell: "And then, people directly involved in the Legacy program are afraid for their lives, so they're telling you so that at least somebody at their level can take that information if something bad happens to them?" Borland: "I think it was definitely that, but it was also, this is such an isolating, lonely experience, especially for young people to be exposed to the reality of this. If you already don't have the acknowledgement that it's a possibility, like if you're...I don't want to say closed minded. If you're an average Joe Blow going through life, and then all of a sudden this pops up on your radar, and you're seeing physical proof of it, you probably take a step back and go, 'whoa.' So you have that aspect, then these same people have that aspect of it, and they also have the aspect of their government destroying them." (In other words, people like us would be excited to see proof of what we all suspect. But someone new to the topic might freak out a bit.) George Knapp: "So they are going through the same thing you are." Borland "Exactly." Knapp: "Their clearances are in limbo, home break ins, threats..." Borland: "When I come into contact with these people, they had had to resign from their government position and take a contracting job for less money. They were, basically, blacklisted for six months. The only reason they ended up getting a job was because somebody on the Legacy program had hooked them up after six months. And they ended up where I was at, and they heard me talking all this stuff, and they're like, 'Oh, you ended up here too, buddy. So, uh, what the hell is going on here?' Knapp: "It's like the island of bad toys or something like that." Borland: "Yeah." Knapp: "You know, put them all in one basket." Borland: "After I saw what I saw, and I've experienced what I've experienced, I kind of...I think most of us have, taken the delve into all of this material (points toward a bookshelf full of what appear to be UFO books). And you're like, 'I know this is true, I know this is true, I know this is true. Who else is saying these true things? Who else is relaying information I know to be true, to try and make sense of your own life?' "Um, they were aware of what I was talking about. I don't know the capacity in which they were briefed in. There's things that I knew that these people were aware of, but even they would not say. Um, one of those being biologics." ~~~ (This is the best anecdote we have about government officials being briefed on bodies.) Joe Rogan: "When it comes to these...actual entities...do we have an understanding of how many of them we're talking about, and the variety of them?" Grusch: "There is a variety and we have a certain number of (laughs) different things... I talked to people who were familiar with the biological analysis of everything. So we have some idea, not a complete picture because it's like, you know, looking at it, it's like, well I don't even understand the physiology at all. It's like, what the heck? It's like, way different, right? So..." Rogan: "Is there a description of this physiology?" Grusch: "Yeah, no, I was in the room when uhhh... I gotta be careful, I don't wanna... I was in Washington, DC with a very number of senior people that work for members of Congress (Senate staffers seems like a safe bet ~Joe). Put it that way. When I was still in government. And I brought the people who worked on that stuff to The Hill. And this is why the members were so confident to put out the Schumer amendment and stuff. And, I was like, 'Please explain.' And they went into all those details and stuff. And I remember (laughs) some of the professional staff members were like, 'Whoa.' Like they were like, in G-Loc, right? Cause, I mean, and like, a total world bubble got burst right there for a lot of people." Source, with video... ~Back to Dylan~ Knapp: "You think there's a storehouse of that information that anybody would have put something away in case something bad happened to them? And do you know what happened to these people?" Borland: "You know the ones that I know still continue in the government. Um, I think they continue in classified-operations programs." Knapp: "They're not coming forward." Borland: "They would never come forward in a million years unless they were gonna die. And that's...it really sucks for me coming forward, because I only came forward because I sincerely believed they were going to die. Sucks."

Joe Murgia

61,078 views • 9 months ago

Avlon: Within a week of Katrina, there was 10 billion passed.. Aidala: But Katrina was something that was very difficult to prevent. The surging of the waters. People think about a fire and basic things like having the right people in the right place with the right equipment and the water available to them in the reservoirs and in the pumping stations. That has to do with infrastructure. I don't know if they could have prepared for Katrina the way they they should have foreseen it. This was so foreseeable.
1:37

Avlon: Within a week of Katrina, there was 10 billion passed.. Aidala: But Katrina was something that was very difficult to prevent. The surging of the waters. People think about a fire and basic things like having the right people in the right place with the right equipment and the water available to them in the reservoirs and in the pumping stations. That has to do with infrastructure. I don't know if they could have prepared for Katrina the way they they should have foreseen it. This was so foreseeable.

Acyn

480,393 views • 1 year ago

Yorgos Lanthimos on how he got the inspiration to make "Dogtooth" (2009): "Interviewer: What made you want to do a movie about this family? Lanthimos: I think the idea came from watching friends that had recently gotten married or had children. I’ve never had children or been married and I was fooling around with them, asking, ‘Are you sure? Is this going to work? Is this a good idea? Can’t you see all these families falling apart?’ And they were getting very defensive and scared just by me making these jokes. If they got so irritated by the idea of this thing falling apart, what would someone do, in an extreme situation, to keep their family together? Interviewer: And the family unit can be a useful placeholder for a lot of different systems. There was one member of the audience who was convinced the movie was a metaphor for welfare states and modern Europe… Lanthimos: The whole idea started with the family and we realized later that it could be seen as whatever else. It could work as an allegory, which is a word I don’t really like; I never think that way. It started off with, ‘What’s the future of the family going to be?’ How can you narrow people’s minds by educating them—telling them, ‘this is the right thing, this is the wrong thing’? When we wrote the script and started working on the film it was obvious that, OK, this works in any system, society, relationship, country. It’s a microcosm." (Yorgos Lanthimos's interview with Michael Zelenko, Rumpus, 2010) Watch Arturo Ripstein's "The Castle of Purity" (1973) & then you will really know from where he got the idea to make the movie. P.S: On this day, 17 years ago, "Dogtooth" (2009) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.
0:43

Yorgos Lanthimos on how he got the inspiration to make "Dogtooth" (2009): "Interviewer: What made you want to do a movie about this family? Lanthimos: I think the idea came from watching friends that had recently gotten married or had children. I’ve never had children or been married and I was fooling around with them, asking, ‘Are you sure? Is this going to work? Is this a good idea? Can’t you see all these families falling apart?’ And they were getting very defensive and scared just by me making these jokes. If they got so irritated by the idea of this thing falling apart, what would someone do, in an extreme situation, to keep their family together? Interviewer: And the family unit can be a useful placeholder for a lot of different systems. There was one member of the audience who was convinced the movie was a metaphor for welfare states and modern Europe… Lanthimos: The whole idea started with the family and we realized later that it could be seen as whatever else. It could work as an allegory, which is a word I don’t really like; I never think that way. It started off with, ‘What’s the future of the family going to be?’ How can you narrow people’s minds by educating them—telling them, ‘this is the right thing, this is the wrong thing’? When we wrote the script and started working on the film it was obvious that, OK, this works in any system, society, relationship, country. It’s a microcosm." (Yorgos Lanthimos's interview with Michael Zelenko, Rumpus, 2010) Watch Arturo Ripstein's "The Castle of Purity" (1973) & then you will really know from where he got the idea to make the movie. P.S: On this day, 17 years ago, "Dogtooth" (2009) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.

DepressedBergman

48,872 views • 1 month ago

Why Joe Rogan started going to church regularly: “When I was younger, I was very cynical about religion, and then I've gotten older…” "One of the things that I always say is, if there was a pill that could make you as nice as the people that I go to church with, everybody would be on it. They are the nicest f*cking people you'll ever encounter." "If you get just to the teachings of Christ—I can't find any faults in it. Like, it's all about being kind. It's all about this idea that we're all in this together, and that you're supposed to lift each other up and look after each other. There's no faults in it."
1:40

Why Joe Rogan started going to church regularly: “When I was younger, I was very cynical about religion, and then I've gotten older…” "One of the things that I always say is, if there was a pill that could make you as nice as the people that I go to church with, everybody would be on it. They are the nicest f*cking people you'll ever encounter." "If you get just to the teachings of Christ—I can't find any faults in it. Like, it's all about being kind. It's all about this idea that we're all in this together, and that you're supposed to lift each other up and look after each other. There's no faults in it."

Defiant Ghost

346,893 views • 4 months ago

Why Apple is fumbling AI, and how they could course correct (hint: buy OpenAI for $500B) Thomas Laffont explains: "I've studied Apple basically my whole career." "If you think about their defining competitive advantage, it was the integration of hardware and software that led to the beautiful MacBook that we're all using. It led to the iPhone." "And the fact that they were so coupled between hardware and software, the user interface, you know, etc. And I think it directly led to them winning ... the mobile era." "In AI, they're the opposite. They don't control the silicon, they don't control the underlying models." "And so now they're back to maybe, using a historical analogy, the PC makers who didn't control the OS." "So I think the good news for them is, look, they still have a monopoly on users. They have $3T of market cap to kind of play with." "So I think it's way too early to count them out." "What's the most extreme thing that they could do? Just for intellectual sake, right?" "Buy OpenAI for $500B. I'm just gonna put a crazy thing out there." "So you think, okay, that's the most extreme." "Well, is it even that extreme? And what would Apple's stock do that day?" Chamath Palihapitiya: "Go up." "That's my view too. I actually think it would go up, not down even if they did something like that." "I would love to see them be a little bit more aggressive."
1:17

Why Apple is fumbling AI, and how they could course correct (hint: buy OpenAI for $500B) Thomas Laffont explains: "I've studied Apple basically my whole career." "If you think about their defining competitive advantage, it was the integration of hardware and software that led to the beautiful MacBook that we're all using. It led to the iPhone." "And the fact that they were so coupled between hardware and software, the user interface, you know, etc. And I think it directly led to them winning ... the mobile era." "In AI, they're the opposite. They don't control the silicon, they don't control the underlying models." "And so now they're back to maybe, using a historical analogy, the PC makers who didn't control the OS." "So I think the good news for them is, look, they still have a monopoly on users. They have $3T of market cap to kind of play with." "So I think it's way too early to count them out." "What's the most extreme thing that they could do? Just for intellectual sake, right?" "Buy OpenAI for $500B. I'm just gonna put a crazy thing out there." "So you think, okay, that's the most extreme." "Well, is it even that extreme? And what would Apple's stock do that day?" Chamath Palihapitiya: "Go up." "That's my view too. I actually think it would go up, not down even if they did something like that." "I would love to see them be a little bit more aggressive."

The All-In Podcast

67,295 views • 1 year ago

Elon Musk: The team could see me sleeping on the floor, so they knew I was there, and that made a huge difference. “For a while I was just sleeping under my desk, which is out in the open in the factory for an important reason. It was damn uncomfortable sleeping on that floor. And always when I woke up, I'd smell like metal dust. I just slept on the floor under my desk so that, during shift change, the entire team could see me. This is important because the team, if they think their leader is off somewhere having a good time, drinking mai tais on a tropical island – which I could definitely have been doing and would much have preferred to do, I'm not actually a masochist, I think – but the thing is that since the team could see me sleeping on the floor during shift change, just with nothing, they knew I was there and that made a huge difference. And then they gave it their all.” From: Baron Investment Conference, November 4, 2022
1:11

Elon Musk: The team could see me sleeping on the floor, so they knew I was there, and that made a huge difference. “For a while I was just sleeping under my desk, which is out in the open in the factory for an important reason. It was damn uncomfortable sleeping on that floor. And always when I woke up, I'd smell like metal dust. I just slept on the floor under my desk so that, during shift change, the entire team could see me. This is important because the team, if they think their leader is off somewhere having a good time, drinking mai tais on a tropical island – which I could definitely have been doing and would much have preferred to do, I'm not actually a masochist, I think – but the thing is that since the team could see me sleeping on the floor during shift change, just with nothing, they knew I was there and that made a huge difference. And then they gave it their all.” From: Baron Investment Conference, November 4, 2022

ELON CLIPS

255,633 views • 1 year ago

Bam Adebayo GOES IN on the critics that says his 83 point game performance is unethical: "For the couch coaches, I mean, if you're in my shoes and you have, first of all, y'all are blaming me. You should be blaming the head coach. Get that first. I was not the one letting me go one-on-one the whole game until I had 70, and then you started to send a double. At that point, I got 70 with, like, what? nine minutes left to go in the game you think i'm not going for it like like and that's the thing that's crazy when they talk about the unethical part of the basketball i'm like if i have 70 points with 9 minutes to go Who would just be like, you know, coach, just take me out. Yeah, right. Anybody in my shoes with nine minutes left? Okay. A minute? All right. Nine? Yeah, I'm going for it. You can't be mad at that. If you are mad, I don't care because a lot of people, they're upset because if they did play, they never had a chance to get that close to chasing greatness. And then if you get that close to chasing greatness, that's the point of chasing it so you can surpass it. And some of the people have never played basketball. So like if you've been in the backyard and you and a couple of your homies have been playing 21 and you got 19. You're not going to get an easy look off. And four, they're going to talk about the free throws. It's not like I shoot 15 free throws a game. It's not like I average 10 free throws a game. You can watch the film. I was legitimately getting fouled every time. So I went to the free throw line."
1:51

Bam Adebayo GOES IN on the critics that says his 83 point game performance is unethical: "For the couch coaches, I mean, if you're in my shoes and you have, first of all, y'all are blaming me. You should be blaming the head coach. Get that first. I was not the one letting me go one-on-one the whole game until I had 70, and then you started to send a double. At that point, I got 70 with, like, what? nine minutes left to go in the game you think i'm not going for it like like and that's the thing that's crazy when they talk about the unethical part of the basketball i'm like if i have 70 points with 9 minutes to go Who would just be like, you know, coach, just take me out. Yeah, right. Anybody in my shoes with nine minutes left? Okay. A minute? All right. Nine? Yeah, I'm going for it. You can't be mad at that. If you are mad, I don't care because a lot of people, they're upset because if they did play, they never had a chance to get that close to chasing greatness. And then if you get that close to chasing greatness, that's the point of chasing it so you can surpass it. And some of the people have never played basketball. So like if you've been in the backyard and you and a couple of your homies have been playing 21 and you got 19. You're not going to get an easy look off. And four, they're going to talk about the free throws. It's not like I shoot 15 free throws a game. It's not like I average 10 free throws a game. You can watch the film. I was legitimately getting fouled every time. So I went to the free throw line."

Ahmed/The Ears/IG: BigBizTheGod 🇸🇴

373,778 views • 3 months ago

Sigourney Weaver on what she loved about her character in "Alien" (1979): "Interviewer: Ripley is now seen as this feminist action hero. Did you think about that or the politics of your representation at the time? Weaver: What I loved about Ripley in the first one, thanks to [producers] Walter [Hill] and David [Giler], and in the second one, thanks to Jim Cameron, was that I didn't really feel like a badass heroine ever. What I felt was like you or me in this situation, [wondering] what the f**k you were going to do. It was an everyman character that could be any of us. That was very unusual at the time that a character, a woman character, went through a whole film, doing difficult things by herself, a lot of the time, and didn't have some scene where she bursts into tears and cries in a corner for a while. Because I'm telling you, in those days, they really wanted women to be sympathetic. And that meant that either you had to be in a little skirt and run around, or you had to have these scenes where you cried and broke down because they thought if you didn't that you would seem unfeminine. So I was so lucky that I avoided all of that because I was doing science fiction, because I was in the future. And I was just playing this character who was put in this situation. And it was written like a man. It wasn't written like the way they wrote women in those days." ("At 28, Sigourney Weaver Was Thrust Into An Alien World", Zosha Millman, Bustle, 2021) P.S: On this day, 47 years ago, "Alien" (1979) had its limited release in the USA.
1:44

Sigourney Weaver on what she loved about her character in "Alien" (1979): "Interviewer: Ripley is now seen as this feminist action hero. Did you think about that or the politics of your representation at the time? Weaver: What I loved about Ripley in the first one, thanks to [producers] Walter [Hill] and David [Giler], and in the second one, thanks to Jim Cameron, was that I didn't really feel like a badass heroine ever. What I felt was like you or me in this situation, [wondering] what the f**k you were going to do. It was an everyman character that could be any of us. That was very unusual at the time that a character, a woman character, went through a whole film, doing difficult things by herself, a lot of the time, and didn't have some scene where she bursts into tears and cries in a corner for a while. Because I'm telling you, in those days, they really wanted women to be sympathetic. And that meant that either you had to be in a little skirt and run around, or you had to have these scenes where you cried and broke down because they thought if you didn't that you would seem unfeminine. So I was so lucky that I avoided all of that because I was doing science fiction, because I was in the future. And I was just playing this character who was put in this situation. And it was written like a man. It wasn't written like the way they wrote women in those days." ("At 28, Sigourney Weaver Was Thrust Into An Alien World", Zosha Millman, Bustle, 2021) P.S: On this day, 47 years ago, "Alien" (1979) had its limited release in the USA.

DepressedBergman

20,477 views • 1 month ago

“I Walked Into My Boss's Office and Fired Myself” - Chase Koch on the Importance of Finding Your Power Alley “I was promoted to president of Koch Fertilizer at that time, and about nine months in, I realized that I was not the guy for the job. And I walked in my boss's office and fired myself. Humiliating, especially being the boss's son. Oh my God, I'm a failure. I couldn't make this work. The business was still doing fine, but I wasn't doing a good job as a leader. And I knew there was someone else that had the comparative advantage to be a great operator, CEO, president type role. And so I learned through all that, that I wasn't an operator, and I was a builder. Like, all I wanted to do was go build this stuff, you know, this whole idea of creative destruction, that would disrupt the core business that I was running. Understanding your comparative advantage, what you're good at and what you're not, relative to others that could be doing that job, was a huge deal. My hope was that that was a little bit of an example for other Koch leaders as well. If you're not in the right job, you don't have to, like, fire yourself, but figure out what your power alley really is and where you can contribute and add the most value.” --------------------------------------- Thanks to our partner for making this possible Most advertisers have never heard of the platform with an $11B annual run rate in ad spend. by AppLovin — 1B+ daily active users, full-screen video ads watched for a median of 35 seconds, and businesses are profitably spending hundreds of thousands of dollars a day on it. Advertiser access is in closed beta. The window is open at Axon by AppLovin
1:02

“I Walked Into My Boss's Office and Fired Myself” - Chase Koch on the Importance of Finding Your Power Alley “I was promoted to president of Koch Fertilizer at that time, and about nine months in, I realized that I was not the guy for the job. And I walked in my boss's office and fired myself. Humiliating, especially being the boss's son. Oh my God, I'm a failure. I couldn't make this work. The business was still doing fine, but I wasn't doing a good job as a leader. And I knew there was someone else that had the comparative advantage to be a great operator, CEO, president type role. And so I learned through all that, that I wasn't an operator, and I was a builder. Like, all I wanted to do was go build this stuff, you know, this whole idea of creative destruction, that would disrupt the core business that I was running. Understanding your comparative advantage, what you're good at and what you're not, relative to others that could be doing that job, was a huge deal. My hope was that that was a little bit of an example for other Koch leaders as well. If you're not in the right job, you don't have to, like, fire yourself, but figure out what your power alley really is and where you can contribute and add the most value.” --------------------------------------- Thanks to our partner for making this possible Most advertisers have never heard of the platform with an $11B annual run rate in ad spend. by AppLovin — 1B+ daily active users, full-screen video ads watched for a median of 35 seconds, and businesses are profitably spending hundreds of thousands of dollars a day on it. Advertiser access is in closed beta. The window is open at Axon by AppLovin

The All-In Podcast

48,347 views • 1 month ago

"In 'Zodiac' (2007), I wanted the audience to feel like they went through the ringer with these guys,(...) in retrospect you look at it & say maybe audiences who are looking for entertainment on a Friday night don’t want that toll taken on them." --- David Fincher Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: It’s so rare to walk out of a movie and to feel like I know more about a subject than I did walking into it. Watching Zodiac is like the experience of reading a really absorbing non-fiction book, and I know that part of it for you was about honoring the people who were the victims of the Zodiac, but you also have so many details, so many facts, you take it to such a level where there’s so much information… why was that important to you? Fincher: I don’t respect movies that treat me like I don’t have the attention span or mental faculty to follow… it’s one thing to talk about Dave Toschi’s fall from grace in an oblique and generic way. I can answer that question in a couple of different ways. I wanted the movie to take its toll on the audience, I wanted the audience to feel like they went through it, like they went through the ringer with these guys, and I didn’t know how to do that because these guys didn’t run across rooftops and fall off fire escapes. In their quest to bring the Zodiac to justice they followed the trail of breadcrumbs as far as it would take them, and they kept pushing and kept pushing when there were crackpots coming out of the woodwork. I felt like I didn’t want to make one of those movies where you do montage/montage/montage and you get the idea that they went to the mat with this, that it took its toll – I wanted the audience to feel that. You know, in retrospect you look at it and say maybe audiences who are looking for entertainment on a Friday night don’t want that toll taken on them. I felt like anything less than that would be doing the story and people involved a disservice. You could do it as something compressed, where you get the gist of it, and we would have shots of Jake [Gyllenhaal] half asleep and you would have those obligatory shots where the boss says, ‘You look like sh!t.’ And in the end I still don’t feel like you get enough of what happens with his family, we don’t get enough with his wife and kids, but it was all we could do to get it in at under two hours and forty minutes. I feel like we took about as much time as you can really expect an audience to sit still for and we tried to make them feel what it was like to be invested in this circuitous run down the rabbit hole." (David Fincher's interview with Devin Farachi, 2008)
1:27

"In 'Zodiac' (2007), I wanted the audience to feel like they went through the ringer with these guys,(...) in retrospect you look at it & say maybe audiences who are looking for entertainment on a Friday night don’t want that toll taken on them." --- David Fincher Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: It’s so rare to walk out of a movie and to feel like I know more about a subject than I did walking into it. Watching Zodiac is like the experience of reading a really absorbing non-fiction book, and I know that part of it for you was about honoring the people who were the victims of the Zodiac, but you also have so many details, so many facts, you take it to such a level where there’s so much information… why was that important to you? Fincher: I don’t respect movies that treat me like I don’t have the attention span or mental faculty to follow… it’s one thing to talk about Dave Toschi’s fall from grace in an oblique and generic way. I can answer that question in a couple of different ways. I wanted the movie to take its toll on the audience, I wanted the audience to feel like they went through it, like they went through the ringer with these guys, and I didn’t know how to do that because these guys didn’t run across rooftops and fall off fire escapes. In their quest to bring the Zodiac to justice they followed the trail of breadcrumbs as far as it would take them, and they kept pushing and kept pushing when there were crackpots coming out of the woodwork. I felt like I didn’t want to make one of those movies where you do montage/montage/montage and you get the idea that they went to the mat with this, that it took its toll – I wanted the audience to feel that. You know, in retrospect you look at it and say maybe audiences who are looking for entertainment on a Friday night don’t want that toll taken on them. I felt like anything less than that would be doing the story and people involved a disservice. You could do it as something compressed, where you get the gist of it, and we would have shots of Jake [Gyllenhaal] half asleep and you would have those obligatory shots where the boss says, ‘You look like sh!t.’ And in the end I still don’t feel like you get enough of what happens with his family, we don’t get enough with his wife and kids, but it was all we could do to get it in at under two hours and forty minutes. I feel like we took about as much time as you can really expect an audience to sit still for and we tried to make them feel what it was like to be invested in this circuitous run down the rabbit hole." (David Fincher's interview with Devin Farachi, 2008)

DepressedBergman

19,335 views • 4 months ago

Former medical coder and whistleblower Zowe Smith: "A program called Tiberius... was provided by Palantir... the same Tiberius program that we believe is used in Gaza to identify targets... for... Operation Warp Speed, to assign people behavior scores... So did you go and get your vaccines? Did you volunteer? Did you put on your mask? Did you do distancing? They [could] tell all of that. They could tell location data, they could tell ethnicity, they could tell what's your [financial situation], they could tell who you've been around. And the Tiberius program would use that to assign you a behavior score. "They [used] that to target their countermeasure strikes. So where [they sent] their ventilators, where [they sent] the remdesivir, and where [they sent] the vaccines that people [weren't] taking. That was the program that informed those decisions... [the] Palantir Tiberius program." This clip of Smith (Zowe Smith), who is also the author of The Covid Code: My Life in the Thrill Kill Medical Cult, is taken from a conversation with The Real Natureboy (The Real Natureboy) posted to Rumble on December 5, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Then I found Whitney Webb's article talking about HHS Protect and how that was a pro—There was a program called Tiberius built into that that was provided by Palantir. This is the same Tiberius program that we believe is used in Gaza to identify the targets, the Hamas targets for drone strikes. Same program, but it was used for a military operation, Operation Warp Speed, to assign people behavior scores. "So did you go and get your vaccines? Did you volunteer? Did you, put on your mask? Did you do distancing? They can tell all of that. They could tell location data, they could tell ethnicity, they could tell what's your finance, they could tell who you've been around. And the Tiberius program would use that to assign you a behavior score. "They also use that information since hospitals had to send, things like their, their case mix index, how many patients were there, how many ventilators. They use that to target their countermeasure strikes. So where do they send their ventilators, where do they send the remdesivir, and where do they send the vaccines that people aren't taking? That was the program that informed those decisions, was this Palantir Tiberius program. And the reason it's so nefarious is as you mentioned earlier, they have drones here in America. Our police are already using them. I checked in my state, in my county, they've had contracts since 2011 to get drones here, and they're already using them. They're saying that they're using them for, people that have firearms. "So it's like a firearms response team, I think it's called. F.I.T. is their acronym. And so it's any person who's suspected of having a firearm, they'll send a drone out instead of a police officer because it would be dangerous for a police officer to go and get shot, but not as bad for a drone to go and get shot. "So that's how they're framing it. Are these armed drones or are these just observational drones? I think they're just observational at this moment in time. But there is an article, peer-reviewed article actually, talking about how to deploy different Covid measures, countermeasures, and having drones deliver packages, like having drones deliver vaccines. "It's not going to be that hard. I mean, our military already has what's called LMAMs, which are, that's their acronym for like a individually autonomous flying drone, like a swarm of them. And those are the ones that could have, I forget what their military term is. But it could be a weapon or it could be a drug."
2:45

Former medical coder and whistleblower Zowe Smith: "A program called Tiberius... was provided by Palantir... the same Tiberius program that we believe is used in Gaza to identify targets... for... Operation Warp Speed, to assign people behavior scores... So did you go and get your vaccines? Did you volunteer? Did you put on your mask? Did you do distancing? They [could] tell all of that. They could tell location data, they could tell ethnicity, they could tell what's your [financial situation], they could tell who you've been around. And the Tiberius program would use that to assign you a behavior score. "They [used] that to target their countermeasure strikes. So where [they sent] their ventilators, where [they sent] the remdesivir, and where [they sent] the vaccines that people [weren't] taking. That was the program that informed those decisions... [the] Palantir Tiberius program." This clip of Smith (Zowe Smith), who is also the author of The Covid Code: My Life in the Thrill Kill Medical Cult, is taken from a conversation with The Real Natureboy (The Real Natureboy) posted to Rumble on December 5, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Then I found Whitney Webb's article talking about HHS Protect and how that was a pro—There was a program called Tiberius built into that that was provided by Palantir. This is the same Tiberius program that we believe is used in Gaza to identify the targets, the Hamas targets for drone strikes. Same program, but it was used for a military operation, Operation Warp Speed, to assign people behavior scores. "So did you go and get your vaccines? Did you volunteer? Did you, put on your mask? Did you do distancing? They can tell all of that. They could tell location data, they could tell ethnicity, they could tell what's your finance, they could tell who you've been around. And the Tiberius program would use that to assign you a behavior score. "They also use that information since hospitals had to send, things like their, their case mix index, how many patients were there, how many ventilators. They use that to target their countermeasure strikes. So where do they send their ventilators, where do they send the remdesivir, and where do they send the vaccines that people aren't taking? That was the program that informed those decisions, was this Palantir Tiberius program. And the reason it's so nefarious is as you mentioned earlier, they have drones here in America. Our police are already using them. I checked in my state, in my county, they've had contracts since 2011 to get drones here, and they're already using them. They're saying that they're using them for, people that have firearms. "So it's like a firearms response team, I think it's called. F.I.T. is their acronym. And so it's any person who's suspected of having a firearm, they'll send a drone out instead of a police officer because it would be dangerous for a police officer to go and get shot, but not as bad for a drone to go and get shot. "So that's how they're framing it. Are these armed drones or are these just observational drones? I think they're just observational at this moment in time. But there is an article, peer-reviewed article actually, talking about how to deploy different Covid measures, countermeasures, and having drones deliver packages, like having drones deliver vaccines. "It's not going to be that hard. I mean, our military already has what's called LMAMs, which are, that's their acronym for like a individually autonomous flying drone, like a swarm of them. And those are the ones that could have, I forget what their military term is. But it could be a weapon or it could be a drug."

Sense Receptor

24,740 views • 6 months ago

PsyopQueen was an enigmatic sock account that popped up on UFOtwitter/X a few years ago & had everybody trying to guess who she was. I thought it would be funny to depict the landscape of UFOx in an anime format. This started out as a meme and the idea that you can turn anything into a story while having fun with your friends. If you've been around UFOtwitter for a while, you'll get the easter eggs. All these ai-haters are freaking out about a meme meant for a small community of like 20 people. What are they so scared of?
2:26

PsyopQueen was an enigmatic sock account that popped up on UFOtwitter/X a few years ago & had everybody trying to guess who she was. I thought it would be funny to depict the landscape of UFOx in an anime format. This started out as a meme and the idea that you can turn anything into a story while having fun with your friends. If you've been around UFOtwitter for a while, you'll get the easter eggs. All these ai-haters are freaking out about a meme meant for a small community of like 20 people. What are they so scared of?

PsyopAnime

28,553 views • 7 months ago

Leslie Lamport (Turing Award Winner, Inventor of Paxos & Latex): "I would meet with Dijkstra once a week. When he thought of something, had some idea, he would write it down and send it out to people. He sent the first concurrent garbage collection algorithm. I looked at it, and I realized that I could simplify the algorithm. That seemed to me like a very simple idea, a very obvious idea. And I sent it to him, and then I got the next version of the paper. I discovered he had made me an author, and that had actually impressed Dijkstra. The reason for my success, the reason I wound up getting a Turing Award, was not that I was particularly that smart, but that I had this gift of abstraction, and Dijkstra was smart enough to realize that."
0:45

Leslie Lamport (Turing Award Winner, Inventor of Paxos & Latex): "I would meet with Dijkstra once a week. When he thought of something, had some idea, he would write it down and send it out to people. He sent the first concurrent garbage collection algorithm. I looked at it, and I realized that I could simplify the algorithm. That seemed to me like a very simple idea, a very obvious idea. And I sent it to him, and then I got the next version of the paper. I discovered he had made me an author, and that had actually impressed Dijkstra. The reason for my success, the reason I wound up getting a Turing Award, was not that I was particularly that smart, but that I had this gift of abstraction, and Dijkstra was smart enough to realize that."

Ryan Peterman

172,061 views • 2 months ago

Louis Tomlinson about his fans for TikTok IRL! “It's quite a big answer, but the first thing that came to mind like if you know I think on the last tour I did close to like a hundred shows, right? So occasionally you will have a show that is not as good. Maybe as the rest vocally, you know Maybe you're a little tired. Maybe a little hungover. Maybe both And there are some I've had some amazing live moments in the tour where I really really I feel like maybe people can hear that I'm not maybe in the best voice and The level of support and love that I feel in the room in those moments I feel like any time with my fan base that you know If I'm ever kind of struggling a little bit I really really feel the love and support from them and and that's really really special I think I spoke about it quite a few times and it's I've almost run out words at this point the relationship that we have With each other and i'm not just being the typical cliche Sing a song right here say my friends are the best in the world They are but truthfully the relationship I think that we have is really really special. I often describe it as like a codependency And it really is like that, you know like I They make the shows better for me and then because of that I make the show better for them. So Those kind of shared moments together and the moments where we've been fighting together I think they're really really special to me.”
1:21

Louis Tomlinson about his fans for TikTok IRL! “It's quite a big answer, but the first thing that came to mind like if you know I think on the last tour I did close to like a hundred shows, right? So occasionally you will have a show that is not as good. Maybe as the rest vocally, you know Maybe you're a little tired. Maybe a little hungover. Maybe both And there are some I've had some amazing live moments in the tour where I really really I feel like maybe people can hear that I'm not maybe in the best voice and The level of support and love that I feel in the room in those moments I feel like any time with my fan base that you know If I'm ever kind of struggling a little bit I really really feel the love and support from them and and that's really really special I think I spoke about it quite a few times and it's I've almost run out words at this point the relationship that we have With each other and i'm not just being the typical cliche Sing a song right here say my friends are the best in the world They are but truthfully the relationship I think that we have is really really special. I often describe it as like a codependency And it really is like that, you know like I They make the shows better for me and then because of that I make the show better for them. So Those kind of shared moments together and the moments where we've been fighting together I think they're really really special to me.”

OT5 Daily

18,358 views • 9 months ago

"There was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing." ~TB 💥 If Trump Waives Eric Davis' NDAs, Is This Some of What We Can Expect to Hear? 💥 (I may not be first with these clips but I try to include info. that you won't get anywhere else.) If that information about lifeforms, and what they were doing, was accurate, it's the type of information the world deserves to know. Was it Dr. Eric Davis who briefed him/them on that? I have a sneaking suspicion that it was, and I have NOT asked Davis about this.) "All these rumors that you hear...just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me...actually has occurred." ~TB ~ Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "If I knew what you knew, I would not be able to sleep at night." Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (TB): "Yeah, I was briefed in a situation, and they got into some pretty intense stuff." Hannity: "Can I ask who briefed you?" Burchett: "You can ask but I can't tell." (Again: My Guess: Dr. Eric Davis. I could be wrong, but it makes a lot of sense to me. Here's why... This is a message from Davis to me, from January... Why Won't Davis Share What He Know with Congress? Davis: "I already shared my information in a Pentagon SCIF with the SASC staff in Oct. 2019 and in a controlled access conference room in a Senate office building with the SSCI staff in Oct. 2019 and at a defense company’s controlled access room in June 2021. "Then I shared it with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's committee in a House of Representatives office building SCIF last May. (Burchett is part of that committee, and that's one reason why I feel like Davis is the one Burchett is referring to when he says someone briefed him on some intense stuff.) Davis: "So the 'Why won’t he?' has already been answered." Murgia: "So what changes if a President waives your NDAs?" Davis: "If the POTUS were to waive my NDAs, I could share everything I know with the public." (PUBLIC!) ~~~ Hannity: "Have you ever told Donald Trump about all the obstacles they're throwing in your face?" Burchett: "No, I haven't. As a matter of fact, I had a discussion with somebody last week. They said, you need to have lunch with [Trump]. It's very difficult to get, you know, he's, right now, of course, things going on all over the world." Hannity: "But you're also saying, on the other hand, on a need-to-know basis. And that means the President's not on a need-to-know basis? Our duly-elected president, information is being withheld from him?" Burchett: "I believe so. I was told that, even. Yeah, in the SCIF, this one time, where they asked me, where you're quoting, I mean, there was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing. And different..." Hannity: "Lifeforms alive here? Lifeforms dead here?" Burchett: "Possibly. Both. Both." Hennity: "And vehicles that have been recovered here?" Burchett: "Yeah, and some that have possibly come here, and not in a crash-type setting (laughs). We had an individual that gave..." (Again, this feels like Davis was the guy briefing them. He has spoken about crashed AND landed craft, including the alleged Holloman AFB landing-and-meeting event.) Burchett: "And this was interesting about the whole thing was because, there's all the folks in there, and there's different groups of people, and Rep. Eric Burlison's a dear friend of mine. Because in the beginning, he was a big skeptic (According to Burlison, he still IS a skeptic. ~Joe), you know? And I asked him to join us in some of this stuff because I needed somebody that just wasn't like me, that just had been..." Hannity: "Skepticism's healthy." Burlison: "It's very healthy. I mean, you know...but a lot of people that were skeptics. But we were in this one meeting in a secure environment, and a member came in who is not really friendly to the cause. And really was a disrupter and started asking questions. And the person who was briefing us named names, dates, times, places, events, people." (That sounds exactly like the meticulous, and detail-orientated, Dr. Eric Davis. 😎 ) Burchett: "Because I'd asked a question about Jimmy Carter. There was talk, I just threw it out there, that Carter... I didn't like his politics, but I don't question his faith." (Sad that Burchett even feels the need to mention Carter's politics.) Burchett: "And they said that [Carter] was briefed at one time and became physically upset with the information that he was given." Hannity: "Of course he did." (This seemed like snide remark from Hannity, as in, Carter wasn't a real man and he couldn't handle information like that without getting upset. Cheap shot, but that's Hannity.) Burchett: "Yeah, but he had actually seen a UFO, it's a documented thing. And this person that was briefing us gave the date of that meeting and he gave the receipts. He said, 'You can go to the Carter library,' and he gave the date. and said... And there was, I think four people in the meeting (with Carter), and they listed three of them, and one of them, they weren't sure who it was. So it was probably, you know, CIA or something. And it ended up upsetting [Carter] so much that they pretty much had to clear his calendar for a while. But what is that?" (Again, that sounds like a Davis briefing.) Burchett: "And the thing is, everything that I've...all these rumors that you hear in the movies, in the books and the magazines that I read growing up, just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me that this is actually has occurred. And that, to me, is, I wonder, is this stuff being planted? Is it being pushed out, so that we gradually get a hold of it?" (Hopefully, we get to hear what Burchett and the others heard so we can judge the veracity of it and see if we can somehow confirm any of it.)
4:06

"There was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing." ~TB 💥 If Trump Waives Eric Davis' NDAs, Is This Some of What We Can Expect to Hear? 💥 (I may not be first with these clips but I try to include info. that you won't get anywhere else.) If that information about lifeforms, and what they were doing, was accurate, it's the type of information the world deserves to know. Was it Dr. Eric Davis who briefed him/them on that? I have a sneaking suspicion that it was, and I have NOT asked Davis about this.) "All these rumors that you hear...just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me...actually has occurred." ~TB ~ Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "If I knew what you knew, I would not be able to sleep at night." Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (TB): "Yeah, I was briefed in a situation, and they got into some pretty intense stuff." Hannity: "Can I ask who briefed you?" Burchett: "You can ask but I can't tell." (Again: My Guess: Dr. Eric Davis. I could be wrong, but it makes a lot of sense to me. Here's why... This is a message from Davis to me, from January... Why Won't Davis Share What He Know with Congress? Davis: "I already shared my information in a Pentagon SCIF with the SASC staff in Oct. 2019 and in a controlled access conference room in a Senate office building with the SSCI staff in Oct. 2019 and at a defense company’s controlled access room in June 2021. "Then I shared it with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's committee in a House of Representatives office building SCIF last May. (Burchett is part of that committee, and that's one reason why I feel like Davis is the one Burchett is referring to when he says someone briefed him on some intense stuff.) Davis: "So the 'Why won’t he?' has already been answered." Murgia: "So what changes if a President waives your NDAs?" Davis: "If the POTUS were to waive my NDAs, I could share everything I know with the public." (PUBLIC!) ~~~ Hannity: "Have you ever told Donald Trump about all the obstacles they're throwing in your face?" Burchett: "No, I haven't. As a matter of fact, I had a discussion with somebody last week. They said, you need to have lunch with [Trump]. It's very difficult to get, you know, he's, right now, of course, things going on all over the world." Hannity: "But you're also saying, on the other hand, on a need-to-know basis. And that means the President's not on a need-to-know basis? Our duly-elected president, information is being withheld from him?" Burchett: "I believe so. I was told that, even. Yeah, in the SCIF, this one time, where they asked me, where you're quoting, I mean, there was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing. And different..." Hannity: "Lifeforms alive here? Lifeforms dead here?" Burchett: "Possibly. Both. Both." Hennity: "And vehicles that have been recovered here?" Burchett: "Yeah, and some that have possibly come here, and not in a crash-type setting (laughs). We had an individual that gave..." (Again, this feels like Davis was the guy briefing them. He has spoken about crashed AND landed craft, including the alleged Holloman AFB landing-and-meeting event.) Burchett: "And this was interesting about the whole thing was because, there's all the folks in there, and there's different groups of people, and Rep. Eric Burlison's a dear friend of mine. Because in the beginning, he was a big skeptic (According to Burlison, he still IS a skeptic. ~Joe), you know? And I asked him to join us in some of this stuff because I needed somebody that just wasn't like me, that just had been..." Hannity: "Skepticism's healthy." Burlison: "It's very healthy. I mean, you know...but a lot of people that were skeptics. But we were in this one meeting in a secure environment, and a member came in who is not really friendly to the cause. And really was a disrupter and started asking questions. And the person who was briefing us named names, dates, times, places, events, people." (That sounds exactly like the meticulous, and detail-orientated, Dr. Eric Davis. 😎 ) Burchett: "Because I'd asked a question about Jimmy Carter. There was talk, I just threw it out there, that Carter... I didn't like his politics, but I don't question his faith." (Sad that Burchett even feels the need to mention Carter's politics.) Burchett: "And they said that [Carter] was briefed at one time and became physically upset with the information that he was given." Hannity: "Of course he did." (This seemed like snide remark from Hannity, as in, Carter wasn't a real man and he couldn't handle information like that without getting upset. Cheap shot, but that's Hannity.) Burchett: "Yeah, but he had actually seen a UFO, it's a documented thing. And this person that was briefing us gave the date of that meeting and he gave the receipts. He said, 'You can go to the Carter library,' and he gave the date. and said... And there was, I think four people in the meeting (with Carter), and they listed three of them, and one of them, they weren't sure who it was. So it was probably, you know, CIA or something. And it ended up upsetting [Carter] so much that they pretty much had to clear his calendar for a while. But what is that?" (Again, that sounds like a Davis briefing.) Burchett: "And the thing is, everything that I've...all these rumors that you hear in the movies, in the books and the magazines that I read growing up, just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me that this is actually has occurred. And that, to me, is, I wonder, is this stuff being planted? Is it being pushed out, so that we gradually get a hold of it?" (Hopefully, we get to hear what Burchett and the others heard so we can judge the veracity of it and see if we can somehow confirm any of it.)

Joe Murgia

29,438 views • 7 days ago

Jay Park shared how LNGSHOT’s second mixtape came to life The idea started when he played LNGSHOT’s first mixtape to producer Hwimin. After listening, Hwimin told him that while the music was good, he expected a mixtape to feel a little more raw, energetic, and unfiltered. That comment stuck with them. Since they had been making music that was relatively smooth and easy-listening, they decided to take a different approach and create something with more grit and intensity. Jay also explained that the goal was never to make a song that would go viral. Instead, they wanted to create a project that felt complete as an album and reflected their artistic vision. For him, the mixtape would be a success if listeners could genuinely feel the effort, care, and sincerity that went into every part of it. #롱샷 #LNGSHOT #JayPark
0:44

Jay Park shared how LNGSHOT’s second mixtape came to life The idea started when he played LNGSHOT’s first mixtape to producer Hwimin. After listening, Hwimin told him that while the music was good, he expected a mixtape to feel a little more raw, energetic, and unfiltered. That comment stuck with them. Since they had been making music that was relatively smooth and easy-listening, they decided to take a different approach and create something with more grit and intensity. Jay also explained that the goal was never to make a song that would go viral. Instead, they wanted to create a project that felt complete as an album and reflected their artistic vision. For him, the mixtape would be a success if listeners could genuinely feel the effort, care, and sincerity that went into every part of it. #롱샷 #LNGSHOT #JayPark

자스 ✮

18,388 views • 1 month ago