Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

317,071 views • 24 days ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

THE BLOODLINE OF JESUS AND MARY MAGDALENE PART V: THE VIKING GOD-KINGS SAFEGUARDING THE HOLY BLOODLINE 👑 The Northern Migration 👑 From the fateful union of Athaulf and Maria in 414 AD, a northern spark flared - the birth of a lineage that journeyed north from the realms of Gaul. Carried by Visigothic nobles who immediately moved this strand of the holy bloodline northward into Scandinavia for protection. Resettling in Sweden, Denmark and Norway, the merged bloodline fused with the Odinic clans, reinforcing the existing Odinic heritage and strengthening the deep-rooted legacy of the ancient warrior God-Kings and their sacred rites. 👑 The Dual Branches’ Masterful Strategy 👑 Sustaining two divergent branches - the southern Merovingians in Gaul and the northern Odinic Vikings in Scandinavia - constituted a profound tactical design, engineered to reinforce the sacred bloodline of Jesus against utter annihilation. This division scattered vulnerabilities across lands, permitting each path to evolve autonomously while bolstering the whole through sporadic unions and common lore, erecting a robust structure that confounded unified assaults from the Roman Church. 👑 Rise of the Ulvungar Dynasty 👑 By the 8th century, the northern line manifested in the Ulvungar dynasty, direct heirs of the Athaulf-Maria union, igniting the great Viking saga as resolute warriors bound by sacred duty. This formidable house, rooted in the fused Odinic and Davidic veins, orchestrated a grand design to counter the hegemony of Roman Christianity, launching calculated counterattacks through Viking raids that echoed across seas and shores, safeguarding their divine legacy against doctrinal erasure. After the Ulvungar kings secured the unification of Norwegian realms under king Harald Fairhair around 890 AD, Norway emerged as an ideal refuge for concealing the holy bloodline, its rugged isolation and delayed Christianization - resisting until around 1030 AD - provided a haven free from immediate ecclesiastical intrusion. 👑 Ragnar Lothbrok’s Reign 👑 We find a culmination of the bloodline’s story in the 9th century with Ragnar Lothbrok, the legendary Viking hero and king, who descended from the Ulvungar line. Ragnar’s exploits, including raids on England and France, unfolded as part of a broader strategy to challenge Roman Christian dominance, drawing on the dynasty’s dual heritage for legitimacy. Historical events like the Viking Age onset around 793 saw Ragnar’s sons - such as Ivar the Boneless and Björn Ironside - extending the line further - into the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Their actions resulted in significant Viking governance and settlement in substantial portions of the island. This is supported by sagas like the Saga of Ragnar Lothbrok and cross-referenced with DNA studies. 👑 Legacy of the Merged Bloodline 👑 The merged holy bloodline not only shaped royal houses but also influenced major events, such as the Viking conquests and the Norman invasion of England in 1066. The lineage endured through careful alliances. This can be traced drawing on privately owned primary records as well as renewed modern insight into historical documents, with family trees mapping its sacred flow and genetic markers affirming its ancient bonds. 👑 Guardians of the Holy Bloodline 👑 The Vikings perceived themselves as custodians of the holy bloodline, a self-imposed duty rooted in their ancestral mandate to preserve Jesus’ legacy from erasure. This facet of history endured attempts at concealment and revision by the Church, which sought to dominate narratives and quash alternative descents that challenged its authority. Their guardians’ ethos infused every endeavor. Raids and expansions were - not bloodthirsty theft as portrayed by the Church’ historians - but strategic defenses against ecclesiastical overreach, ensuring the bloodline’s truths remained intact beyond orthodox chronicles. 👑

Bendleruschka

22,751 views • 5 months ago

I had the same thought so I've been playing with it in nanochat. E.g. here's 8 agents (4 claude, 4 codex), with 1 GPU each running nanochat experiments (trying to delete logit softcap without regression). The TLDR is that it doesn't work and it's a mess... but it's still very pretty to look at :) I tried a few setups: 8 independent solo researchers, 1 chief scientist giving work to 8 junior researchers, etc. Each research program is a git branch, each scientist forks it into a feature branch, git worktrees for isolation, simple files for comms, skip Docker/VMs for simplicity atm (I find that instructions are enough to prevent interference). Research org runs in tmux window grids of interactive sessions (like Teams) so that it's pretty to look at, see their individual work, and "take over" if needed, i.e. no -p. But ok the reason it doesn't work so far is that the agents' ideas are just pretty bad out of the box, even at highest intelligence. They don't think carefully though experiment design, they run a bit non-sensical variations, they don't create strong baselines and ablate things properly, they don't carefully control for runtime or flops. (just as an example, an agent yesterday "discovered" that increasing the hidden size of the network improves the validation loss, which is a totally spurious result given that a bigger network will have a lower validation loss in the infinite data regime, but then it also trains for a lot longer, it's not clear why I had to come in to point that out). They are very good at implementing any given well-scoped and described idea but they don't creatively generate them. But the goal is that you are now programming an organization (e.g. a "research org") and its individual agents, so the "source code" is the collection of prompts, skills, tools, etc. and processes that make it up. E.g. a daily standup in the morning is now part of the "org code". And optimizing nanochat pretraining is just one of the many tasks (almost like an eval). Then - given an arbitrary task, how quickly does your research org generate progress on it?

Andrej Karpathy

1,635,760 views • 3 months ago