正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Kai Trump broke down what it’s actually like trying to date while being followed 24/7 by the Secret Service: Logan Paul : "What is dating like for you?" Kai Trump: "It’s really awkward when you're on a date with a guy and the Secret Service is sitting two tables...

1,413,903 次观看 • 24 天前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

I know a setup like this for many people would look cool and convenient but hear me out. I would only utilize something like this while parked in a camping area with other people. I would not use this by myself in the middle of the woods like this. I don’t feel they are safe and I’ll explain why. First off and most importantly, I don’t see a safe way to secure it. It’s all thin plastic sheeting meant to be waterproof but can be easily cut to gain access. If anyone wanted to cause harm or rob you, all they have to do is cut through the sheeting and they would have access to everything. It wouldn’t be hard to break into this. Then I look at how long it takes to setup, while it shows one person can set this up by themselves. Look at how long it takes to do this, it’s very impractical. I feel something like this that’s an add on to a vehicle should be much easier, like pushing a button and everything is pops out by itself. In an emergency I couldn’t imagine trying to fold things back in the right way while trying to escape. Could you imagine trying to outrun a bear in this only for it to be ripped off by tree branches cause you couldn’t fold it in time? The scenario I’m thinking of is what if I am being chased by a wild animal like a wolf or a bear. I couldn’t just hop in my Jeep and take off with this setup. Everything is folded out and tethered into the ground. It’s not like a traditional tent I could leave behind. If I was out camping with friends for a few days I think this could be ok. But doing a van life of camping for months at a time during the summer months wouldn’t be safe or practical as a solid unit like a standard RV. I wouldn’t be comfortable or safe in something like this.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

409,219 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨President Trump announced that there might be a high-level meeting with Zelenskyy as early as this weekend, but didn’t specify if he would participate, and once again reiterated that UA should hold elections right now (note: it’s against the constitution to hold elections during the martial law, also it’s simply not safe, and UA society is widely opposed to the idea). TRUMP: “They would like us to go to a meeting over the weekend, in Europe, and we’ll make a determination depending on what they come back with. We don’t wanna be wasting time. Sometimes you have to let people fight it out, and sometimes you don’t. But the problem with letting people fight it out is you’re losing thousands of people a week. It’s ridiculous. The whole thing is ridiculous.” Q: “And when you say that the European leaders want to have a meeting over the weekend, are you talking about with Zelenskyy or with them?” TRUMP: “With Zelenskyy and us.” Q: “And you said in an interview yesterday that you think it’s time for Zelenskyy to start accepting things. What things are you talking about?” TRUMP: “Well, I think he has to be realistic. And I do wonder about how long is it gonna be till they have an election. You know, for a democracy, it’s a long time. They haven’t had an election in a long time. There was a poll that came out, 82% of the people are demanding a settlement be made, Ukrainian people. They wanna see a settlement be made. I understand that. They’re losing thousands and thousands of people a week. They wanna see it ended. And I do say at what point, when do they have an election in Ukraine? That’s not casting aspersions on anybody, but they do have a massive corruption situation going on there… People are asking this question, ‘When do they have an election?’ Are they gonna have an election, or are they gonna just keep it going like this? So, I think it’s time to get that war settled, and I think it’s a war that can be settled. But it takes two to tango.”

Kateryna Lisunova

10,801 次观看 • 8 个月前

This is one of the most important parts of Tucker Carlson’s speech and it got overlooked American can’t afford to buy homes, Tucker says this is a National Emergency “At some point the basic economics really matter. And they matter because not that it's bad that rich people are getting richer, it's bad that everyone else is getting poorer. And it's especially bad the young people can't afford homes. Let me just put a very precise point on this. If you want a measure of how your economy is doing, I personally favor eliminating GDP as a measure. I don't even know what that is. It's clearly not relevant. — My measure is really simple. I got a bunch of kids. Can they afford houses with full time jobs at like 27, 28? And the answer is no way. And the answer is that 35 year olds with really good jobs can't afford a house unless they stretch and go deep into debt. And I just think that's a total disaster. That's a complete disaster. Why? Two reasons: - One, if people don't own things, they don't feel ownership of the country they're in. And the country gets super volatile because people feel like they've got nothing to lose. When you have a lawn, trust me, you're thinking long term. - Second, it's really hard to have a family without a house. It is. It's like super fun to live in an apartment. If you know there's like a bar downstairs, you're in a cool neighborhood. I'm in East Village. It's so cool. Try to have three kids. You're not going to have three kids there. You can. Nobody wants to raise their kids in that neighborhood. Nobody wants to raise their kids in an apartment. People do it. People, they have to. Nobody wants to. People want a little house. Not some McMansion, just a little normal house. That is the actual American dream. — But most people's parents can't afford to do that. — So that is a national emergency. One of the reasons it's happening is because normal people with normal jobs no longer believe they can win in this system and that all the money is going to the worst people, and no one even stops to ask what the hell is going on. What I'm saying is that our leadership class should say something about it and should assign a moral value to it. And if you're getting rich by loaning money to people at incredibly high interest rates, that's something you're gonna have to talk to God about. That is not good. That is not virtuous. That's disgusting” Nobody, and I mean NOBODY in power seems to care about this

Wall Street Apes

1,849,648 次观看 • 1 年前

“And anyway, I wanted to clarify something that was told to me in a half-assed way by some fanatical people, because I don’t call these people fans, I call them fanatics. And thank God they eventually remove themselves from the community on their own, because fundamentally they were never really part of the community to begin with, given the kinds of actions and thoughts they have. Now, you all know very well that there are people among you who help me, whom I absolutely welcome and appreciate a lot, actually, probably more than what they even give me. And as a result, I do have a human, working relationship that goes beyond just being a fan, right? So of course, in certain circumstances, because of specific skills people have and the kind of help they give, it’s obvious that more conversations start happening and a more developed human relationship begins, beyond a simple… you know. That’s how life works. It’s not like I can live my life and talk to every single one of you in the exact same way. It’s normal,choices are made based on the situations that come up. Anyone who’s mentally healthy understands this and tries to build a human relationship with me in some way. But those who aren’t healthy think, “Well, why does she talk to her and not to me?” But I can’t talk to everyone. Even though I try to do it in my own way, if I started talking to every single one of you, my life would obviously be over. And I think that applies to anyone who has a community or a group of people who follow them. So then this thing came out about me going to Disneyland. But, holy crap, as they say, maybe! Maybe I would go to Disneyland! And even if I did go to Disneyland, it’s none of your fucking business if I want to go to Disneyland. What the fuck do you care if I want to go to Disneyland? It’s my business. Also, I haven’t been to Disneyland in 18 years, last time was with a friend from high school. But even then, it’s still my business if I want to go with whomever I want: if I’m dating someone or not, if I want to go with a friend, if I want to go with a fan I choose from among you. Is it my business or not? I mean, is everything okay with you people? And then, what the fuck does it change for you? Do you appreciate me for who I am? Good. Appreciate me for who I am and for what I do, not for who I’m with or where I go. Sometimes it feels like I’m talking to a jealous girlfriend. But I already, normally, believe me, don’t get involved with certain people, or a certain type of person, because jealousy and unresolved issues really bother me. Let me explain better. Let’s say I get into a relationship. My partner should never make jealousy scenes. You want to go to Disneyland with your friends? Go. Don’t go. What do I care? That’s your business. It’s great that our paths cross and we have a beautiful, loving life together, but that doesn’t erase my other relationships or my other bonds. Sometimes, with some people in this community, it feels like I’m dating them, like they think I’m their girlfriend. That’s not normal. You’re fanatics, you’re not well. So it’s actually a good thing if you don’t come to the meetups I organize. I even send you a kiss and bye-bye, good riddance, because you’re not right in the head. Anyway, what was I saying… maybe I’d really like to go to Disneyland, but honestly I don’t even have the head for Disneyland anymore. I’ve got other stuff going on in my brain, as they say, and for now I prefer working over going to Disneyland. Also, instead of Disneyland, I would’ve preferred the Maldives, if we really want to say it. Or at least the sea, one way or another. But if I go to London, if I go to Paris, it’s for one reason: to have the chance to work and create content. And on the other hand, to meet you. So if I go to Paris that day, it’s because I’m trying to organize a day where I can go and meet you for an hour or so, because I’m only there for a day. And I hope you can understand that.”

Korslayage

69,047 次观看 • 6 个月前

Naval Ravikant: "The only true test of intelligence is if you get what you want out of life" "There are two parts to that. One is getting what you want, so you know how to get it. The second is wanting the right things, knowing what to want in the first place. I could want to be a 6'8" basketball player and I'm not going to get that. That's wanting something you can't get. But there's also wanting something that's a booby prize, prizes that are just not worth having, or that create their own problems." Naval explains how people end up in places they never meant to be: "If you're not careful, you can end up in a place in life not only that you don't want to be, but one you didn't even mean to get to. Usually people end up there because they're going on autopilot with societal expectations. Or out of guilt. Or out of mimetic desire, our desires are picked up from other people. Go to law school, go to med school, go to business school. Or it might be what your parents expect. Guilt is just society's voice speaking in your head so you'll be a good little monkey." He shares a problem most people have: "We run on these four-year cycles. You join a startup, you vest over four years. College is four years. High school is four years. You go to law school, that's a 5-year cycle. You become a lawyer, that's a 40-year cycle. These are very long cycles. But the amount of time we spend deciding what to do and who to do it with? Very short. We spend one month deciding on a job where we're going to be for 10 years." Naval's rule: "If you're making a four-year decision, spend a year thinking it through. Really thinking it through. 25% of the time." He explains the Secretary Theorem: "It turns out the optimal time to search is about a third. By a third of the way through, you've seen enough to know what the bar is. Then anybody who meets or exceeds that bar is good enough. But here's the key: it's not time-based. It's iteration-based. You need to take opportunities quickly and bail out quickly. If you look at failed relationships, the biggest regret is usually staying after you knew it was over." Naval reframes the 10,000 hour rule: "Malcolm Gladwell popularized 10,000 hours to mastery. I'd say it's actually 10,000 iterations to mastery. Iteration is not repetition. Repetition is doing the same thing over and over. Iteration is modifying it with learning and doing another version. That's error correction. If you get 10,000 error corrections in anything, you will be an expert." On pessimism vs. optimism: "You want to be skeptical about specific things, every specific opportunity is probably a fail. But you want to be optimistic in the general. Something in here is going to work out. If something fails, it was a learning experience. It was an iteration. As long as you learned something, it's a win. You don't want to jump into the first thing. But once you find the match, you have to be willing to go all in. Move your chips to the center of the table." He concludes: "Most people are stuck in this gray bit. 'I'm half in, but I don't really know.' That doesn't work. It's a barbell strategy, black or white. Explore quickly, cut losses fast. Then when you find the right thing, compound into it."

Jaynit

74,370 次观看 • 5 个月前