Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Most AI world models impress you for 20 seconds. The harder problem is making them stay coherent. That's what stood out to me in Robbyant's LingBot-World-Infinity. Instead of chasing another resolution headline, the paper focuses on reducing autoregressive drift the issue where small prediction errors compound until the world... slowly falls apart. Their stress test is a single uninterrupted 60-minute rollout across 20 different scenarios with no visible quality decay. If you want to see the interactive system yourself, it's live on Reactor: 🎮 I also like that they don't pretend it's perfect. The paper openly says it doesn't have true long-term memory. Leave an area and come back later, and it regenerates something plausible instead of recalling the exact same place. That's a refreshingly honest limitation. Open weights make it even more interesting to dig into. Robbyant For anyone who wants to explore the research: 💻 GitHub: 🤗 Model Weights:show more

Shruti Codes

107,339 subscribers

15,066 просмотров • 15 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

This is a pretty wild model! You can use it to turn an image into a 3D object with texture. The quality is out of this world! I'm not even a designer, and I've been using this nonstop for the last 2 hours. The model is Hunyuan 3D 2.1. It's open source. You'll find model weights, training/inference code, data pipelines, and architecture on their repository. You can even fine-tune it if you want! GitHub Repository: By the way, the model runs on consumer-grade GPUs. You don't need a datacenter for this! I've been using the model from the HuggingFace demo page: To use it, go to the link and upload an image. That's it! Check out the video I recorded for a couple of examples.

This is a pretty wild model! You can use it to turn an image into a 3D object with texture. The quality is out of this world! I'm not even a designer, and I've been using this nonstop for the last 2 hours. The model is Hunyuan 3D 2.1. It's open source. You'll find model weights, training/inference code, data pipelines, and architecture on their repository. You can even fine-tune it if you want! GitHub Repository: By the way, the model runs on consumer-grade GPUs. You don't need a datacenter for this! I've been using the model from the HuggingFace demo page: To use it, go to the link and upload an image. That's it! Check out the video I recorded for a couple of examples.

Santiago

44,783 просмотров • 1 год назад

Rick Rubin: "Make what you love, not what you think people will like" "If you want to live in a creative way, which will benefit everything in your life, be a better person in your family, do a better job starting a new business, it's all the same. I don't really know anything about music. It's more a way of looking at the world and wanting it to be the best it could possibly be. And doing whatever it takes to be the best it could possibly be." Rubin shares how his career happened: "From the beginning, I never thought any of the things I'm doing were possible or realistic. I just did things out of the love of them, thinking I would have real jobs. That my passion would be my hobby, and I'd have a job to support my hobby. And it just magically turned out different than that without me knowing it was possible." On why some things connect and others don't: "The stars line up at certain times for certain things to happen. Sometimes you can make something great, and it doesn't connect for whatever reason. Sometimes you make two things you think are the two best things you've ever made. One of them connects with the world. One of them doesn't. And it might not have anything to do with what's in the art. It might be that it came out the same day as something else. Or there was a bigger story at the time. There's so much to it that we don't understand." He continues: "All we can do is make something good and put it out and hope for the best. That's all there is. We never know why things work. Even if you make a piece of art and it works, you may not know why." On talent versus work ethic: "There are a lot of talented people who never make it because they don't have the work ethic. It's not just talent, talent's a piece. And you could argue for some people, the work ethic trumps the talent." Rubin explains what real collaboration is: "Having worked with a lot of bands, I see there's often this friction where people are trying to get their idea in. That's not a collaboration. A real collaboration is when everyone who's there is working together towards whatever is the best thing for the whole. Whether it's your idea or someone else's idea, it doesn't matter. If you're invested in the collaboration, you want the best idea to win. You don't want your idea to win." On what makes art great: "What makes it great is the personal. With all of its imperfections. With all of its quirkiness. That's what makes it great. How you see the world that's different from how everyone else sees the world. That's why you're an artist. That's your purpose in sharing your work with the world." He warns against being derivative: "There are these derivative voices where they're finding what they think other people want to hear, and they start saying it because they've heard other people say similar things that are now successful. Even if they have some short-term success doing that, it's not revolutionary. It doesn't change the world. It doesn't last. The people who you first see and you might not like that you come to like because you don't understand them at first, those are the ones that change the world. Those are the ones you dedicate your fandom to for life." Rubin shares his philosophy on taste: "You can't second-guess your own taste for what someone else is going to like. We're not smart enough to know what someone else is going to like. To make something thinking, 'Well, I don't really like it, but I think this group of people will like it,' it's a bad way to play the game of music or art. You have to do what's personal to you. Take it as far as you can go. Really push the boundaries. And people will resonate with it if they're supposed to resonate with it." He describes creativity as catching waves: "We're really talking about magic. The universe conspiring on our behalf if we let it. Being in this flow of catching these waves that anyone can catch. If you're trying to catch it, you're open to it, you see it coming, you take off on every chance you get. And sometimes the ride happens. It's remarkable how it happens. It doesn't come from preconception. It's not an idea. It's through the doing." Rubin explains how ideas exist in the universe: "Have you ever had that experience where you have an idea for something, you don't do it, and then six months later you see someone else has done it? It's not because they took your idea. It's that it's time for that, and you can act on it or not. The best artists are the ones who have the best antenna for this material that's available. It's coming through. The best comedians see the best jokes. They see them coming. We all live in the same world; the way you see it, you have the best joke because you see it best." He closes with how to stay open: "If we listen to what's going on around us, you can overhear a conversation in a coffee shop, and it is the setup for an idea you're working on. You hear a phrase you don't commonly use. My experience is: when you are open and looking for these clues in the world, they're happening all the time. And they're happening often right when you need them."

Rick Rubin: "Make what you love, not what you think people will like" "If you want to live in a creative way, which will benefit everything in your life, be a better person in your family, do a better job starting a new business, it's all the same. I don't really know anything about music. It's more a way of looking at the world and wanting it to be the best it could possibly be. And doing whatever it takes to be the best it could possibly be." Rubin shares how his career happened: "From the beginning, I never thought any of the things I'm doing were possible or realistic. I just did things out of the love of them, thinking I would have real jobs. That my passion would be my hobby, and I'd have a job to support my hobby. And it just magically turned out different than that without me knowing it was possible." On why some things connect and others don't: "The stars line up at certain times for certain things to happen. Sometimes you can make something great, and it doesn't connect for whatever reason. Sometimes you make two things you think are the two best things you've ever made. One of them connects with the world. One of them doesn't. And it might not have anything to do with what's in the art. It might be that it came out the same day as something else. Or there was a bigger story at the time. There's so much to it that we don't understand." He continues: "All we can do is make something good and put it out and hope for the best. That's all there is. We never know why things work. Even if you make a piece of art and it works, you may not know why." On talent versus work ethic: "There are a lot of talented people who never make it because they don't have the work ethic. It's not just talent, talent's a piece. And you could argue for some people, the work ethic trumps the talent." Rubin explains what real collaboration is: "Having worked with a lot of bands, I see there's often this friction where people are trying to get their idea in. That's not a collaboration. A real collaboration is when everyone who's there is working together towards whatever is the best thing for the whole. Whether it's your idea or someone else's idea, it doesn't matter. If you're invested in the collaboration, you want the best idea to win. You don't want your idea to win." On what makes art great: "What makes it great is the personal. With all of its imperfections. With all of its quirkiness. That's what makes it great. How you see the world that's different from how everyone else sees the world. That's why you're an artist. That's your purpose in sharing your work with the world." He warns against being derivative: "There are these derivative voices where they're finding what they think other people want to hear, and they start saying it because they've heard other people say similar things that are now successful. Even if they have some short-term success doing that, it's not revolutionary. It doesn't change the world. It doesn't last. The people who you first see and you might not like that you come to like because you don't understand them at first, those are the ones that change the world. Those are the ones you dedicate your fandom to for life." Rubin shares his philosophy on taste: "You can't second-guess your own taste for what someone else is going to like. We're not smart enough to know what someone else is going to like. To make something thinking, 'Well, I don't really like it, but I think this group of people will like it,' it's a bad way to play the game of music or art. You have to do what's personal to you. Take it as far as you can go. Really push the boundaries. And people will resonate with it if they're supposed to resonate with it." He describes creativity as catching waves: "We're really talking about magic. The universe conspiring on our behalf if we let it. Being in this flow of catching these waves that anyone can catch. If you're trying to catch it, you're open to it, you see it coming, you take off on every chance you get. And sometimes the ride happens. It's remarkable how it happens. It doesn't come from preconception. It's not an idea. It's through the doing." Rubin explains how ideas exist in the universe: "Have you ever had that experience where you have an idea for something, you don't do it, and then six months later you see someone else has done it? It's not because they took your idea. It's that it's time for that, and you can act on it or not. The best artists are the ones who have the best antenna for this material that's available. It's coming through. The best comedians see the best jokes. They see them coming. We all live in the same world; the way you see it, you have the best joke because you see it best." He closes with how to stay open: "If we listen to what's going on around us, you can overhear a conversation in a coffee shop, and it is the setup for an idea you're working on. You hear a phrase you don't commonly use. My experience is: when you are open and looking for these clues in the world, they're happening all the time. And they're happening often right when you need them."

Jaynit

109,107 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Jack Dorsey says the real danger isn't open source AI, it's five CEOS deciding what the world is allowed to build with AI. "These AI companies are building platforms and they're all incentivized around their own particular models. You have to ask them for permission, you have rate limits, and you have all these things. Even what the models spit back are constrained." "What are the technologies where you don't need permission from a company, from a CEO, to work on what you want, to build what you want, to build a business around that? Those are the things that are durable. That's why these open protocols are significant and important." "It limits the potential of really great ideas bringing humanity forward because it's a decision of a group of CEOs that think they know best. They may know best for their company, but they don't know the best for the creativity of the world and what people actually want to do with it." "Fortunately, there's a great movement in open source AI, and DeepSeek was an important moment in this space for exactly that reason to show a different path and to provide something that is not only competitive but better than the models that the corporations are putting out there." "We should not be reliant upon five companies telling us that they know best, and there should not be open source because it's dangerous. No, we should have these things in the open and race towards solutions that stay ahead of all the dangers." PS. If you found value in this post make sure to like and repost this tweet + follow Uncover AI to stay updated with the latest AI news. See you in the next one:

Jack Dorsey says the real danger isn't open source AI, it's five CEOS deciding what the world is allowed to build with AI. "These AI companies are building platforms and they're all incentivized around their own particular models. You have to ask them for permission, you have rate limits, and you have all these things. Even what the models spit back are constrained." "What are the technologies where you don't need permission from a company, from a CEO, to work on what you want, to build what you want, to build a business around that? Those are the things that are durable. That's why these open protocols are significant and important." "It limits the potential of really great ideas bringing humanity forward because it's a decision of a group of CEOs that think they know best. They may know best for their company, but they don't know the best for the creativity of the world and what people actually want to do with it." "Fortunately, there's a great movement in open source AI, and DeepSeek was an important moment in this space for exactly that reason to show a different path and to provide something that is not only competitive but better than the models that the corporations are putting out there." "We should not be reliant upon five companies telling us that they know best, and there should not be open source because it's dangerous. No, we should have these things in the open and race towards solutions that stay ahead of all the dangers." PS. If you found value in this post make sure to like and repost this tweet + follow Uncover AI to stay updated with the latest AI news. See you in the next one:

Uncover AI

36,393 просмотров • 13 дней назад

Rick Rubin tells Andrew Huberman how he deals with creative or writer’s block. He treats his work like a diary entry (and doesn’t worry about internal or external judgment): ➡️ “What's the cause of the block? The block is usually something that's either personal ("I'm not good enough") or it can be a confidence issue ("I don't have anything to say") or it could be...thinking about someone else ("nobody's going to like what I make"). Do you know what I'm saying? So, it's either fear of self-judgment or external judgment. If you're making something with a freedom of "this is something I'm making for myself for now", that is all [you have to do]. It is a diary entry. Everything I make is a diary entry. The beauty of a diary entry is that I can write my diary entry and you can't tell me that my diary entry wasn't good enough. Or that [the diary entry] is not what I experienced. Of course it's what I experienced: I'm writing a personal diary for myself and no one else can judge if it is my experience of my life. Everything we make can be that: a personal reflection of who we are in that moment of time. It doesn't have to be the greatest you could ever do. It doesn't have to have any expectation that it's going to change the world. It doesn't have to sell a certain number of copies for any reason. It doesn't have any of those things at all. It is "I'm making this thing for me and I want to do it to the best of my ability and to where I feel good about it". [The work] is honest of where I'm at and if you're living in this world of just being honest to where you're at, there's nothing blocking you. There are no blocks. The blocks are all based on dealing with a different force or a different perception that is made up.” ⬅️

Rick Rubin tells Andrew Huberman how he deals with creative or writer’s block. He treats his work like a diary entry (and doesn’t worry about internal or external judgment): ➡️ “What's the cause of the block? The block is usually something that's either personal ("I'm not good enough") or it can be a confidence issue ("I don't have anything to say") or it could be...thinking about someone else ("nobody's going to like what I make"). Do you know what I'm saying? So, it's either fear of self-judgment or external judgment. If you're making something with a freedom of "this is something I'm making for myself for now", that is all [you have to do]. It is a diary entry. Everything I make is a diary entry. The beauty of a diary entry is that I can write my diary entry and you can't tell me that my diary entry wasn't good enough. Or that [the diary entry] is not what I experienced. Of course it's what I experienced: I'm writing a personal diary for myself and no one else can judge if it is my experience of my life. Everything we make can be that: a personal reflection of who we are in that moment of time. It doesn't have to be the greatest you could ever do. It doesn't have to have any expectation that it's going to change the world. It doesn't have to sell a certain number of copies for any reason. It doesn't have any of those things at all. It is "I'm making this thing for me and I want to do it to the best of my ability and to where I feel good about it". [The work] is honest of where I'm at and if you're living in this world of just being honest to where you're at, there's nothing blocking you. There are no blocks. The blocks are all based on dealing with a different force or a different perception that is made up.” ⬅️

Trung Phan

1,619,350 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Distilled recap of the back-and-forth with Jensen on export controls: Dwarkesh: Wouldn’t selling Nvidia chips to China enable them to train models like Claude Mythos with cyber offensive capabilities that would be threats to American companies and national security? Jensen: First of all, Mythos was trained on fairly mundane capacity and a fairly mundane amount of it by an extraordinary company. The amount of capacity and the type of compute it was trained on is abundantly available in China. Dwarkesh: With that, could they eventually train a model like Mythos? Yes. But the question is, because we have more FLOPs, American labs are able to get to this level of capabilities first. Furthermore, even if they trained a model like this, the ability to deploy it at scale matters. If you had a cyber hacker, it's much more dangerous if they have a million of them versus a thousand of them. Jensen: Your premise is just wrong. The fact of the matter is their AI development is going just fine. The best AI researchers in the world, because they are limited in compute, also come up with extremely smart algorithms. DeepSeek is not an inconsequential advance. The day that DeepSeek comes out on Huawei first, that is a horrible outcome for our nation. Dwarkesh: Currently, you can have a model like DeepSeek that can run on any accelerator if it's open source. Why would that stop being the case in the future? Jensen: Suppose it optimizes for Huawei. Suppose it optimizes for their architecture. It would put others at a disadvantage. As AI diffuses out into the rest of the world, their standards and their tech stack will become superior to ours because their models are open. Dwarkesh: Tesla sold extremely good electric vehicles to China for a long time. iPhones are sold in China. They didn't cause some lock-in. China will still make their version of EVs, and they're dominating, or smartphones, they're dominating. Jensen: We are not a car. The fact that I can buy this car brand one day and use another car brand another day is easy. Computing is not like that. There's a reason why x86 still exists. There's a reason why Arm is so sticky. These ecosystems are hard to replace. Dwarkesh: It's just hard to imagine that there's a long-term lock-in to the Chinese ecosystem, even if they have this slightly better open-source model for a while. American labs port across accelerators constantly. Anthropic's models are run on GPUs, they're run on Trainium, they're run on TPUs. There are so many things you can do, from distilling to a model that's well fit for your chips. Jensen: China is the largest contributor to open source software in the world. China's the largest contributor to open models in the world. Today it's built on the American tech stack, Nvidia’s. Fact. All five layers of the tech stack for AI are important. The United States ought to go win all five of them. in a few years time, I'm making you the prediction that when we want American technology to be diffused around the world—out to India, out to the Middle East, out to Africa, out to Southeast Asia—on that day, I will tell you exactly about today's conversation, about how your policy ... caused the United States to concede the second largest market in the world for no good reason at all.

Dwarkesh Patel

1,251,510 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

If you go back to Trump's first term and even in the second term, the number of people in the inner circle, it's very volatile. People come, people go. It's kind of like a rotation. You get too close to the sun, your wings melt and you fall out. It's not the end of the free world as we know it. I actually think these two men will get back together again. I know it's salacious, it's really an interesting story, but at the end of the day they both have attributes that the other wants. Elon is a unique individual and Trump is a unique individual. They both have huge egos. They had a bad date. It's like a marriage and they're having a fight. I'm over it already. I think this is noise frankly. I don't think it really matters long-term. They can call each other on their cell phones and work it out and they will.

If you go back to Trump's first term and even in the second term, the number of people in the inner circle, it's very volatile. People come, people go. It's kind of like a rotation. You get too close to the sun, your wings melt and you fall out. It's not the end of the free world as we know it. I actually think these two men will get back together again. I know it's salacious, it's really an interesting story, but at the end of the day they both have attributes that the other wants. Elon is a unique individual and Trump is a unique individual. They both have huge egos. They had a bad date. It's like a marriage and they're having a fight. I'm over it already. I think this is noise frankly. I don't think it really matters long-term. They can call each other on their cell phones and work it out and they will.

Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful

267,461 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨| Sir Lewis Hamilton: "I think (Africa) is the most beautiful part of the world and I don't like that the rest of the world owns so much of it and takes so much from it and no one speaks about it. And I'm really looking forward to and hoping that the people that are running those different countries all unite and come together and take Africa back." "That's what I want to see. Take it back from the French. Take it back from the Spanish. Take it back from Portuguese and the British." "It's so, so important for the future of that country and for that continent. I mean, they have all the resources to be the greatest and most powerful place in the world and that's probably why they are being controlled the way they are." [F1 2026 Australia Press Conference]

🚨| Sir Lewis Hamilton: "I think (Africa) is the most beautiful part of the world and I don't like that the rest of the world owns so much of it and takes so much from it and no one speaks about it. And I'm really looking forward to and hoping that the people that are running those different countries all unite and come together and take Africa back." "That's what I want to see. Take it back from the French. Take it back from the Spanish. Take it back from Portuguese and the British." "It's so, so important for the future of that country and for that continent. I mean, they have all the resources to be the greatest and most powerful place in the world and that's probably why they are being controlled the way they are." [F1 2026 Australia Press Conference]

sim 🇧🇷🇲🇽🇸🇳🇫🇷🇭🇹

1,544,208 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

What you're looking at started as something that most people drive past without a second thought. - Industrial - boring - overlooked And someone looked at it and saw something no one else was seeing. That's the whole game here. You don't have to invent something brand new to make serious money. You just have to see potential where everyone else sees limitations. You have to look at what already exists and imagine it just a little differently. So when you turn something familiar into something unexpected, it becomes shareable and memorable. It becomes the thing that people can't stop talking about because it's different in a world where everything feels the same. People will literally travel hours just to stay somewhere like this because different is the experience now. Nobody cares about another cookie cutter hotel room that they've seen a thousand times, but this gets filmed and posted and sent to friends with the caption "you have to see this place" And suddenly you're booked out months in advance because you gave something people can't get anywhere else. I love that the raw materials here aren't special, it's just space that was sitting there unused and cheap to acquire The success of this is found in the willingness to look at what everyone else ignored and ask "what could this become?" Instead of just accepting what currently is. That's where the opportunity is. There are thousands of: - shipping containers rotting in fields - old grain silos sitting empty - warehouses no one's using - barns that haven't been touched in decades And every single one of them could become something people would pay to experience if someone just had the vision to see it through. You don't need to build it from scratch. You just need to reimagine what's already sitting in front of you. Because the world is full of overlooked things waiting for someone to look at them differently. And I don't care if AI generated the video because the inspiration you get from it is still the same.

Chris Koerner

18,208 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

I am stocked to announce that I won the OpenAI Developers Codex x Mollie Hacka Worldwide Hackathon in Paris. 60+ builders, every one of us working solo, one day to ship. I built mine around a single question: who gets to own intelligence? The default answer is scary. You hand your data to a handful of labs, they train the model, they own it, and you rent back a thin slice of what your own data made possible. That is the bargain on the table today. I do not accept it. So I built Lensemble: a Tapestry like distributed training platform for JEPA based World Models. What does it enable: World Models that a community improves together, keeps sovereign, and co-owns. Two bets sit underneath it. First, the paradigm. Language models predict the next token. Powerful for text, a dead end for the physical world. A robot does not need to autocomplete sentences, it needs to predict what happens next in the world. That is what JEPA does: it learns by predicting representations instead of pixels or tokens. I am convinced world models are the most underrated paradigm in AI right now, and the closest thing we have to a ChatGPT moment for robotics. Second, the politics. Your raw trajectories never leave your machine. Each participant trains locally against a shared protocol and ships only an update, never the data. A federated round folds those updates into one shared world model, a LeWorldModel based model, and the gain is measured, not claimed: a 12k-parameter adapter on a frozen backbone, held-out prediction error down about 12 percent, the model measurably less surprised by the world. Then the upside is split by contribution weight, so the people who improved the model own a share of what it earns. This is the thesis behind Project Tapestry, the AI Alliance and Yann LeCun's push for federated, sovereign frontier AI, carried into world models and robotics. Call it Tapestry for the physical world. All of it built solo, in a single day, with Codex as my pair the whole way. Thank you to OpenAI Codex and Mollie for backing builders who ship real things, and to Boris and the organizing crew for the room and the standard you set. Intelligence the world improves, and the world owns. That is the future I want for my kids, and the one I will keep building.

I am stocked to announce that I won the OpenAI Developers Codex x Mollie Hacka Worldwide Hackathon in Paris. 60+ builders, every one of us working solo, one day to ship. I built mine around a single question: who gets to own intelligence? The default answer is scary. You hand your data to a handful of labs, they train the model, they own it, and you rent back a thin slice of what your own data made possible. That is the bargain on the table today. I do not accept it. So I built Lensemble: a Tapestry like distributed training platform for JEPA based World Models. What does it enable: World Models that a community improves together, keeps sovereign, and co-owns. Two bets sit underneath it. First, the paradigm. Language models predict the next token. Powerful for text, a dead end for the physical world. A robot does not need to autocomplete sentences, it needs to predict what happens next in the world. That is what JEPA does: it learns by predicting representations instead of pixels or tokens. I am convinced world models are the most underrated paradigm in AI right now, and the closest thing we have to a ChatGPT moment for robotics. Second, the politics. Your raw trajectories never leave your machine. Each participant trains locally against a shared protocol and ships only an update, never the data. A federated round folds those updates into one shared world model, a LeWorldModel based model, and the gain is measured, not claimed: a 12k-parameter adapter on a frozen backbone, held-out prediction error down about 12 percent, the model measurably less surprised by the world. Then the upside is split by contribution weight, so the people who improved the model own a share of what it earns. This is the thesis behind Project Tapestry, the AI Alliance and Yann LeCun's push for federated, sovereign frontier AI, carried into world models and robotics. Call it Tapestry for the physical world. All of it built solo, in a single day, with Codex as my pair the whole way. Thank you to OpenAI Codex and Mollie for backing builders who ship real things, and to Boris and the organizing crew for the room and the standard you set. Intelligence the world improves, and the world owns. That is the future I want for my kids, and the one I will keep building.

abdel

17,370 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

. Michael Saylor remembers when he lost $6 billion of paper wealth back in 2000 - and why, in comparison the last 7 months of pain are nothing to him. "We were three days from bankruptcy. So when people are like, 'oh yeah you're down 20%, are you stressed out?' - no, I'm not stressed out." "Seven months ago we were at an all time high. You can't even make a baby in seven months. Ten years is normal. Seven months is a blink." "That's the feature. That's what makes it interesting. It's the most interesting thing in the world. It's the most liquid, most tradable thing in the world." Strategy

. Michael Saylor remembers when he lost $6 billion of paper wealth back in 2000 - and why, in comparison the last 7 months of pain are nothing to him. "We were three days from bankruptcy. So when people are like, 'oh yeah you're down 20%, are you stressed out?' - no, I'm not stressed out." "Seven months ago we were at an all time high. You can't even make a baby in seven months. Ten years is normal. Seven months is a blink." "That's the feature. That's what makes it interesting. It's the most interesting thing in the world. It's the most liquid, most tradable thing in the world." Strategy

MR SHIFT 🦁

57,647 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Stephen Fry, "The world is upside down, and yes as an old leftie who has always thought that spending on defence is criminal and terrible in a world of poverty and famine. But it's changed my view" "That's what you have to do when the world changes, you can't stay the same" "I believe in institutions. I believe in the rule of law. These are the things Trump doesn't believe in" "We know that because he's a convicted felon" "We have to come to a conclusion that the left and right in Britain have far more in common with each other than they do with Trump and the tyrants in the world" "And we have to find an alliance between us and if that involves higher spending on defence, then unfortunately, so be it"

Stephen Fry, "The world is upside down, and yes as an old leftie who has always thought that spending on defence is criminal and terrible in a world of poverty and famine. But it's changed my view" "That's what you have to do when the world changes, you can't stay the same" "I believe in institutions. I believe in the rule of law. These are the things Trump doesn't believe in" "We know that because he's a convicted felon" "We have to come to a conclusion that the left and right in Britain have far more in common with each other than they do with Trump and the tyrants in the world" "And we have to find an alliance between us and if that involves higher spending on defence, then unfortunately, so be it"

Farrukh

390,721 просмотров • 1 год назад

"Things that are really hard to make are really interesting to me. I think people stopped doing profiles because they're really hard to make. They take time. The business model kind of sucks. The pay is terrible. Profile writers are not paid well. The world went a different direction. It's much cheaper and faster to make a stupid TikTok than write a 50 page profile about someone that's careful, and intricate, and well-written. I believe the world is desperate for some stuff like that. The world is so sick of this crap just all day, every day. It's just crap. Everyone makes the junk food comparison because it's a perfect comparison. Junk food got to where it was because it's been optimized for us to want the most of it possible whether or not it's good for us. It's obviously horrible for us. It's the same thing with most content. Everyone knows this in their gut, and we all want something more carefully created. I think profile might be perhaps the ultimate expression of that. If a documentary is like the ultimate profile, maybe that's even harder than writing a profile. The thing I can't wait for is the profile that we write 10 years from now that we start working on today." —Patrick OShaughnessy

David Senra

46,761 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Rick Rubin: "I've met very few billionaires who are happy" "I don't look at the outside very much. I look inward. I try to focus on what do I feel, what am I seeing, in the hopes that by sharing what's going on in me, it resonates with someone else. I can't predict what someone else would like. And I don't think anybody can. So if I'm authentically true to myself, that's the best chance of someone else liking something." Rubin explains the paradox of acceptance: "People want to be accepted. And I'm suggesting that the best way to be accepted is to be yourself. It's not to change yourself to what someone else thinks. First of all, you don't really know what someone else thinks. And if you're not genuine to yourself, nothing is there. It's just a projection or a mask. It's not true." On what makes something interesting: "In a sea of information, the more yours is personal, the more it's not like hers or his or theirs, the more it's yours. If we're all thinking the same thing, it's boring. Why would we make anything if everyone thinks the same thing? What makes us interesting are the differences. Even the imperfections. The imperfections are what make us human." Rubin shares what captures his attention: "There's so much middle of the road, and it doesn't interest me. I want it because it's louder, quieter, softer, harder. It's pushing some boundary. That's why I take notice. It's not more of the same. It's the one that makes you stop and think: did I really hear that? Did I really see that? What's going on here?" On what success actually means: "If I like it, that doesn't mean anything. That's what people think. Just because I like it doesn't give it any value. But as an artist, if you like it, that's all of the value. That's the success. It comes when you say, 'I like this enough for other people to see it.' Not 'other people like it, so it's successful.' That doesn't mean anything. Because other people liking it is out of your control. All that's in your control is making the thing to the best of your ability." Rubin reframes what greatness means: "I came to realize recently, it's all an offering to God. And if you're making an offering to God, you're not thinking about the budget, or hoping this segment of the audience is going to like it. We don't think like that. It's a higher vibration. We're making the best we can make, to the best of our ability, out of love and devotion. That's what it is. There is no higher form." On criticism and reviews: "Most of the artists I work with don't read any criticism or reviews, good or bad. The ones who are the strongest in who they are can even read a terrible review and laugh at it. Because when someone gives you criticism, it's telling you as much about who they are as what you've made." Rubin explains the only real competition: "The idea of the Oscars or the Grammys, where we're saying which album is better than another, it doesn't make any sense to me. Because it's always apples and oranges. The only people we can honestly compete with is ourselves. Is this the best I can make today? Have I gone further than I've gone before? That's all we can do. That's the only competition that makes sense." On the obsession required for mastery: "Many of the artists that are great at what they do are great for one reason: they fall in love with this thing, and they just want to know everything they could possibly learn about it. I'm working on a documentary project with comedians now. One of the things they talk about is their commitment; when other people are going out on the weekend, they're going to perform every night they possibly can. For a period of 10 years. Having bad performances. Having people not like what they do. Banging their head against the wall. But that obsession with breaking through, and when I say breaking through, I don't mean to the audience. I mean with themselves." Rubin shares a hard truth about dreams and jobs: "Maybe your purpose in life isn't related to your job. Maybe your job is your job, and the job is the thing that supports you. And then the rest of your waking hours are devoted to your purpose. Don't let following your dreams undermine your ability to support yourself. If you decide 'I want to be a comedian and I'm putting all my eggs in the comedian basket', the pressure of having to support yourself will change you as a comedian. Not for the better. You want the stability of being able to take care of yourself in the world to be free to do whatever your passion is." He challenges the mythology of genius: "There's a mythology that the people who make things that we love are special people, the people on Mount Olympus, magic people who are geniuses. And then there's the rest of us. That's not the case. We're all just people. We're all doing our best. We're all good at some things, not good at other things. We're humans. And sometimes we find a way to make something beautiful." Rubin shares his most vulnerable moment: "The call came: 'How do you feel? You have the number one album in the country.' And I remember saying, 'I've never been more unhappy in my life.' We mistakenly think some kind of outward success is going to change something in us. And it does not. It may make life more comfortable. But it doesn't change who we are. Any hole in ourselves that we're hoping to fill does not get filled." He explains why successful people are often unhappy: "If you spend 20 years of your life working towards a goal that's going to solve everything, and then you finally achieve what you've been trying to do for 20 years, and nothing changes, that's when you get hopeless. It's not uncommon to see very successful artists who are very unhappy. I'm sure you've met many very successful business people. Billionaires. Very few of them are happy. Very few. They've accomplished their dreams and are unhappy. Because we don't know what we want. We're trying to fill something that maybe can't be filled through material or public success. It's something else. Some internal thing." Rubin closes with this: "Don't do things just because you think you're going to get something for it. That's not why we do things. Do what's interesting to you. Follow what's interesting. Don't worry about the outcome. We can never predict the outcome. Follow your own inner guide. It might not make sense to anyone else. It might not even make sense to us. And that's okay. The wisest thing we can do is know enough to know we don't know. Anytime you think 'I know how it is' your world just got a lot smaller."

Rick Rubin: "I've met very few billionaires who are happy" "I don't look at the outside very much. I look inward. I try to focus on what do I feel, what am I seeing, in the hopes that by sharing what's going on in me, it resonates with someone else. I can't predict what someone else would like. And I don't think anybody can. So if I'm authentically true to myself, that's the best chance of someone else liking something." Rubin explains the paradox of acceptance: "People want to be accepted. And I'm suggesting that the best way to be accepted is to be yourself. It's not to change yourself to what someone else thinks. First of all, you don't really know what someone else thinks. And if you're not genuine to yourself, nothing is there. It's just a projection or a mask. It's not true." On what makes something interesting: "In a sea of information, the more yours is personal, the more it's not like hers or his or theirs, the more it's yours. If we're all thinking the same thing, it's boring. Why would we make anything if everyone thinks the same thing? What makes us interesting are the differences. Even the imperfections. The imperfections are what make us human." Rubin shares what captures his attention: "There's so much middle of the road, and it doesn't interest me. I want it because it's louder, quieter, softer, harder. It's pushing some boundary. That's why I take notice. It's not more of the same. It's the one that makes you stop and think: did I really hear that? Did I really see that? What's going on here?" On what success actually means: "If I like it, that doesn't mean anything. That's what people think. Just because I like it doesn't give it any value. But as an artist, if you like it, that's all of the value. That's the success. It comes when you say, 'I like this enough for other people to see it.' Not 'other people like it, so it's successful.' That doesn't mean anything. Because other people liking it is out of your control. All that's in your control is making the thing to the best of your ability." Rubin reframes what greatness means: "I came to realize recently, it's all an offering to God. And if you're making an offering to God, you're not thinking about the budget, or hoping this segment of the audience is going to like it. We don't think like that. It's a higher vibration. We're making the best we can make, to the best of our ability, out of love and devotion. That's what it is. There is no higher form." On criticism and reviews: "Most of the artists I work with don't read any criticism or reviews, good or bad. The ones who are the strongest in who they are can even read a terrible review and laugh at it. Because when someone gives you criticism, it's telling you as much about who they are as what you've made." Rubin explains the only real competition: "The idea of the Oscars or the Grammys, where we're saying which album is better than another, it doesn't make any sense to me. Because it's always apples and oranges. The only people we can honestly compete with is ourselves. Is this the best I can make today? Have I gone further than I've gone before? That's all we can do. That's the only competition that makes sense." On the obsession required for mastery: "Many of the artists that are great at what they do are great for one reason: they fall in love with this thing, and they just want to know everything they could possibly learn about it. I'm working on a documentary project with comedians now. One of the things they talk about is their commitment; when other people are going out on the weekend, they're going to perform every night they possibly can. For a period of 10 years. Having bad performances. Having people not like what they do. Banging their head against the wall. But that obsession with breaking through, and when I say breaking through, I don't mean to the audience. I mean with themselves." Rubin shares a hard truth about dreams and jobs: "Maybe your purpose in life isn't related to your job. Maybe your job is your job, and the job is the thing that supports you. And then the rest of your waking hours are devoted to your purpose. Don't let following your dreams undermine your ability to support yourself. If you decide 'I want to be a comedian and I'm putting all my eggs in the comedian basket', the pressure of having to support yourself will change you as a comedian. Not for the better. You want the stability of being able to take care of yourself in the world to be free to do whatever your passion is." He challenges the mythology of genius: "There's a mythology that the people who make things that we love are special people, the people on Mount Olympus, magic people who are geniuses. And then there's the rest of us. That's not the case. We're all just people. We're all doing our best. We're all good at some things, not good at other things. We're humans. And sometimes we find a way to make something beautiful." Rubin shares his most vulnerable moment: "The call came: 'How do you feel? You have the number one album in the country.' And I remember saying, 'I've never been more unhappy in my life.' We mistakenly think some kind of outward success is going to change something in us. And it does not. It may make life more comfortable. But it doesn't change who we are. Any hole in ourselves that we're hoping to fill does not get filled." He explains why successful people are often unhappy: "If you spend 20 years of your life working towards a goal that's going to solve everything, and then you finally achieve what you've been trying to do for 20 years, and nothing changes, that's when you get hopeless. It's not uncommon to see very successful artists who are very unhappy. I'm sure you've met many very successful business people. Billionaires. Very few of them are happy. Very few. They've accomplished their dreams and are unhappy. Because we don't know what we want. We're trying to fill something that maybe can't be filled through material or public success. It's something else. Some internal thing." Rubin closes with this: "Don't do things just because you think you're going to get something for it. That's not why we do things. Do what's interesting to you. Follow what's interesting. Don't worry about the outcome. We can never predict the outcome. Follow your own inner guide. It might not make sense to anyone else. It might not even make sense to us. And that's okay. The wisest thing we can do is know enough to know we don't know. Anytime you think 'I know how it is' your world just got a lot smaller."

Jaynit

152,854 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Zack Snyder expected fans to edit 300 and 300: Rise of an Empire into a single chronological edit. "Well, this film takes place on the same three days as the Battle of Thermopylae. We just get to see a different perspective. We're not from the Spartan perspective. We're from the Free Greek perspective. And we're following this leader, Thermistocles, who is a naval commander." "Yeah, and the other thing we get to see, I think, that's different in this film is it sort of, it also, it jumps forward and backward a little bit because it also goes and sort of paints the origins of Xerxes. So you get to see Xerxes' birth, what caused him to sort of become the character that you saw in the original film. "And you get to see him, you know, transform before your eyes. So it's a, and that's a mystery too. And it's kind of fun to watch that. And I think it, and then you also get to see sort of some elements of the original film kind of woven through to sort of let you see where you are in context of the timeline of the original film. "So you kind of, every now and then you're just checking in with that sort of, the, you know, the Spartans and their, what they're up to. So it's kind of fun that way too." "I love that there's moments where you go, 'Oh, that's the messenger.' And it's not just the characters you expect to see coming back." "Or like when Daxos rides up and tells Thermistocles, like, 'The hot gates have fallen.' You're like, 'Oh, that's awesome.'" "'That's where he went. I remember him leaving.'" "'That's where he went off on the horse. Remember, he rides in the, it's cool.'" "It's a fun way to see the characters that, you know, that connect us to the original film." "I thought it'd be cool, like, if some fan, you know, once this movie comes out on DVD, they can, some fans could cut the two movies together into a single, like, you could cut them into a single film."

Zack Snyder expected fans to edit 300 and 300: Rise of an Empire into a single chronological edit. "Well, this film takes place on the same three days as the Battle of Thermopylae. We just get to see a different perspective. We're not from the Spartan perspective. We're from the Free Greek perspective. And we're following this leader, Thermistocles, who is a naval commander." "Yeah, and the other thing we get to see, I think, that's different in this film is it sort of, it also, it jumps forward and backward a little bit because it also goes and sort of paints the origins of Xerxes. So you get to see Xerxes' birth, what caused him to sort of become the character that you saw in the original film. "And you get to see him, you know, transform before your eyes. So it's a, and that's a mystery too. And it's kind of fun to watch that. And I think it, and then you also get to see sort of some elements of the original film kind of woven through to sort of let you see where you are in context of the timeline of the original film. "So you kind of, every now and then you're just checking in with that sort of, the, you know, the Spartans and their, what they're up to. So it's kind of fun that way too." "I love that there's moments where you go, 'Oh, that's the messenger.' And it's not just the characters you expect to see coming back." "Or like when Daxos rides up and tells Thermistocles, like, 'The hot gates have fallen.' You're like, 'Oh, that's awesome.'" "'That's where he went. I remember him leaving.'" "'That's where he went off on the horse. Remember, he rides in the, it's cool.'" "It's a fun way to see the characters that, you know, that connect us to the original film." "I thought it'd be cool, like, if some fan, you know, once this movie comes out on DVD, they can, some fans could cut the two movies together into a single, like, you could cut them into a single film."

Zack Snyder Film

20,182 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

This post went crazy viral because it’s common sense “No, diversity is not our strength. Like, look around. Do you think that it's actually working? Does it look like it's actually working? Because every country that's gone in on multiculturalism is dealing with the same exact problems: Whether that's segregated communities that do not mix, whether that's rising cultural tensions, whether that's parallel societies with totally different values, or people living in the same country but with zero sense of unity. And you also have governments that are constantly trying to manage conflict instead of building progress. That's what diversity leads to. That's what multiculturalism leads to. Now, let's look at Japan. Japan did not sign up for that Western experiment that is failing terribly. Japan said no to open-ended immigration, no to mass cultural importing, no to the idea that a country should bend its identity to please everyone else on Earth. Japan built its society around unity, right? Shared culture, shared expectations, and actual social cohesion. If you wanna live there, you assimilate. You join their culture. You don't show up and demand they change to fit you. You don't get a separate set of rules or a separate identity group inside of the country. And the results have spoken for themselves. Japan has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. They have insanely high levels of social trust. They have safe streets. They have a stable society with almost no internal ethnic conflict. They have a world-class economy and innovation without importing millions of people from everywhere else across the world. Look, I'm not against diversity in any capacity, but I am extremely 100% against the idea that diversity is our strength, that more diversity means more success. It doesn't — Multiculturalism in the West has created a competition, not a community. It's everyone fighting for themselves, trying to protect their group, their language, their values, instead of being one nation. And the more diverse that it gets, the more divided everything becomes. And you can see this with the political polarization, the riots, the protests, the constant outrage and the breakdown of citizenship and its trust in the government. The issue isn't immigration. It's importing cultures that refuse to assimilate and then pretending that calling it diversity magically fixes the consequences. Diversity itself isn't the issue, but the issue is pretending that there's like this equal equation in correlation to where when you increase diversity, it always comes with an increase in success and strength, which simply isn't true. Some diversity can be good, but it is not the case that the more diversity you have, the more successful your country will be.”

This post went crazy viral because it’s common sense “No, diversity is not our strength. Like, look around. Do you think that it's actually working? Does it look like it's actually working? Because every country that's gone in on multiculturalism is dealing with the same exact problems: Whether that's segregated communities that do not mix, whether that's rising cultural tensions, whether that's parallel societies with totally different values, or people living in the same country but with zero sense of unity. And you also have governments that are constantly trying to manage conflict instead of building progress. That's what diversity leads to. That's what multiculturalism leads to. Now, let's look at Japan. Japan did not sign up for that Western experiment that is failing terribly. Japan said no to open-ended immigration, no to mass cultural importing, no to the idea that a country should bend its identity to please everyone else on Earth. Japan built its society around unity, right? Shared culture, shared expectations, and actual social cohesion. If you wanna live there, you assimilate. You join their culture. You don't show up and demand they change to fit you. You don't get a separate set of rules or a separate identity group inside of the country. And the results have spoken for themselves. Japan has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. They have insanely high levels of social trust. They have safe streets. They have a stable society with almost no internal ethnic conflict. They have a world-class economy and innovation without importing millions of people from everywhere else across the world. Look, I'm not against diversity in any capacity, but I am extremely 100% against the idea that diversity is our strength, that more diversity means more success. It doesn't — Multiculturalism in the West has created a competition, not a community. It's everyone fighting for themselves, trying to protect their group, their language, their values, instead of being one nation. And the more diverse that it gets, the more divided everything becomes. And you can see this with the political polarization, the riots, the protests, the constant outrage and the breakdown of citizenship and its trust in the government. The issue isn't immigration. It's importing cultures that refuse to assimilate and then pretending that calling it diversity magically fixes the consequences. Diversity itself isn't the issue, but the issue is pretending that there's like this equal equation in correlation to where when you increase diversity, it always comes with an increase in success and strength, which simply isn't true. Some diversity can be good, but it is not the case that the more diversity you have, the more successful your country will be.”

Wall Street Apes

89,216 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🦾 From seeing to doing. We're closing the loop between video prediction and real-world action. On the final day of Robbyant Open Source Week, we bring you LingBot-VA—the world's first causal video-action world model for generalist robot control. 🔥 Key Highlights: 🤖 Predicts & Acts: A single model generates both future video and the actions to make it real. 🧠 Remembers the Past: True long-term memory for complex, sequential tasks. ⚡ Learns in a Snap: Masters new skills with just 30-50 real-world demos. The result? 📈 SOTA on RoboTwin (92.9%) and LIBERO (98.5%), +20% over π0.5 on challenging real-world long-horizon & high-precision tasks. More below 👇 #AI #Robotics #EmbodiedAI #WorldModel #OpenSource

🦾 From seeing to doing. We're closing the loop between video prediction and real-world action. On the final day of Robbyant Open Source Week, we bring you LingBot-VA—the world's first causal video-action world model for generalist robot control. 🔥 Key Highlights: 🤖 Predicts & Acts: A single model generates both future video and the actions to make it real. 🧠 Remembers the Past: True long-term memory for complex, sequential tasks. ⚡ Learns in a Snap: Masters new skills with just 30-50 real-world demos. The result? 📈 SOTA on RoboTwin (92.9%) and LIBERO (98.5%), +20% over π0.5 on challenging real-world long-horizon & high-precision tasks. More below 👇 #AI #Robotics #EmbodiedAI #WorldModel #OpenSource

Robbyant

704,157 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

JUST IN: Atlas Intel CEO predicts Trump's approval ratings have gone down because he is "not implementing new policies that have a visible positive impact in the short-term" "This lack of visible evidence that the policies are implemented, and having a strong immediate impact in terms of bringing prosperity to the US, that's the most problematic thing for the administration today." "Trump promised to reinaugurate an era of prosperity for the US [...] [Not] see the results in 20, 30, 50 years... it was about MAGA *now.* For immigration, they did things really fast...there's no more crisis on the border." "That's kind of solved, it's actually kind of a problem...it's solved to such a degree that nobody really talks about it anymore." "When it comes to virtually everything else - particularly the economy [and] tariffs...we don't even know what the tariffs are." "Tariffs are announced, negotiations are announced, then you have courts challenging the tariffs...if you don't know what the tariffs are, it's even harder to know what the impact will be."

JUST IN: Atlas Intel CEO predicts Trump's approval ratings have gone down because he is "not implementing new policies that have a visible positive impact in the short-term" "This lack of visible evidence that the policies are implemented, and having a strong immediate impact in terms of bringing prosperity to the US, that's the most problematic thing for the administration today." "Trump promised to reinaugurate an era of prosperity for the US [...] [Not] see the results in 20, 30, 50 years... it was about MAGA now. For immigration, they did things really fast...there's no more crisis on the border." "That's kind of solved, it's actually kind of a problem...it's solved to such a degree that nobody really talks about it anymore." "When it comes to virtually everything else - particularly the economy [and] tariffs...we don't even know what the tariffs are." "Tariffs are announced, negotiations are announced, then you have courts challenging the tariffs...if you don't know what the tariffs are, it's even harder to know what the impact will be."

Eric Daugherty

77,003 просмотров • 1 год назад

Rory McIlroy was asked five questions after his 4-under 67 on Friday, and three of them were related to LIV Golf and the news of recent weeks. Here's video of every answer and some of the best tidbits. "When one of the wealthiest sovereign wealth funds in the world thinks that you're too expensive for them, that sort of says something. "But if it is a scenario where they have the option to come back and play on the traditional tours, you know, I think Brian Rolapp has said anything that makes this Tour stronger, anything that makes the DP World Tour stronger, I think everyone should be open to that. That's just good business practice. "If you want to be the most competitive golfer you can be, this is the place to be. And if you don't want to play here, I think that says something about you."

Rory McIlroy was asked five questions after his 4-under 67 on Friday, and three of them were related to LIV Golf and the news of recent weeks. Here's video of every answer and some of the best tidbits. "When one of the wealthiest sovereign wealth funds in the world thinks that you're too expensive for them, that sort of says something. "But if it is a scenario where they have the option to come back and play on the traditional tours, you know, I think Brian Rolapp has said anything that makes this Tour stronger, anything that makes the DP World Tour stronger, I think everyone should be open to that. That's just good business practice. "If you want to be the most competitive golfer you can be, this is the place to be. And if you don't want to play here, I think that says something about you."

Cameron Jourdan

566,018 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Matt Fitzpatrick thinks gambling is “definitely an issue” that’s affecting how fans behave at golf tournaments: “Yeah, it's a great question because you just look at all the messages people get -- footballers, tennis players, you name it, everyone's getting messages of, oh, you missed that penalty; you cost me this. Oh, you didn't make a birdie; cost me this. “I've had my fair share. I would say every golfer that's played a professional tournament has had a message of abuse from someone that is related to gambling. I mean, you could see it this week. You go and type in a player's name who maybe isn't playing well, maybe someone who's favored to play well, you type the name into Twitter and you'll just see their name followed by abuse after abuse after abuse. “It's difficult because I've had 20 quid on England to win the World Cup, but at the same time, if it doesn't come in, I'm not going to send a message to Harry Kane and be like, why did you play rubbish? There's obviously individuals that have that problem. “I don't know, obviously I don't condone gambling in the slightest. It doesn't -- it's not really for me. It's a thing that me and my mate do every World Cup and Euros, that's it. “For me, it's definitely becoming a problem and the issue is, particularly in golf, it would be very easy to influence a bet, whether it's you're shouting on someone's backswing, shouting on a putting stroke. It's really easy. Obviously that is really hard to monitor, but it is definitely an issue.” Matt Fitzpatrick The Open

Matt Fitzpatrick thinks gambling is “definitely an issue” that’s affecting how fans behave at golf tournaments: “Yeah, it's a great question because you just look at all the messages people get -- footballers, tennis players, you name it, everyone's getting messages of, oh, you missed that penalty; you cost me this. Oh, you didn't make a birdie; cost me this. “I've had my fair share. I would say every golfer that's played a professional tournament has had a message of abuse from someone that is related to gambling. I mean, you could see it this week. You go and type in a player's name who maybe isn't playing well, maybe someone who's favored to play well, you type the name into Twitter and you'll just see their name followed by abuse after abuse after abuse. “It's difficult because I've had 20 quid on England to win the World Cup, but at the same time, if it doesn't come in, I'm not going to send a message to Harry Kane and be like, why did you play rubbish? There's obviously individuals that have that problem. “I don't know, obviously I don't condone gambling in the slightest. It doesn't -- it's not really for me. It's a thing that me and my mate do every World Cup and Euros, that's it. “For me, it's definitely becoming a problem and the issue is, particularly in golf, it would be very easy to influence a bet, whether it's you're shouting on someone's backswing, shouting on a putting stroke. It's really easy. Obviously that is really hard to monitor, but it is definitely an issue.” Matt Fitzpatrick The Open

Flushing It

571,626 просмотров • 12 дней назад

MIND-BLOWING 🤯 Angel investor perfectly sums up how the "You Will Own Nothing and Be Happy" strategy is being implemented with UBI, AI, and tokenization "This is the hidden wealth transfer" "Assets are going to become harder and harder to own as a result of AI" "couple that with tokenization, where they won't even let you own the asset" "They want the custodian to own the asset and you to own the token" "AI essentially threatens to separate consumption from ownership" "the universal basic income, or what Elon Musk calls the universal high income, it doesn't solve the problem. It concentrates wealth significantly" "you need to become an owner rather than a consumption supporter" "It's going to be the subordination industrial complex, the subscription industrial complex" "They want you to rent... rather than own the assets, and specifically the assets that are [productive]... that's why they create these manufactured crises to make sure that you own nothing and you're happy" This clip of Simon Dixon (Simon Dixon), an angel investor, Bitcoin OG investor, and former investment banker, is taken from a video posted to the Simon Dixon YouTube channel on June 14, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Assets are going to become harder and harder to own as a result of AI. Now couple that with tokenization, where they won't even let you own the asset. They want the custodian to own the asset and you to own the token. "And you've got these structural paper contracts where they don't want you to own the Bitcoin, they want you to own the paper Bitcoin. So daily life gets cheaper, but ownership gets more expensive. And that's what I think we're witnessing. "That's the trend that I'm looking out for and that's what I think the data is. This is the hidden wealth transfer. So the headlines during this whole thing will say to you, everything's getting cheaper. "AI is making everyone's life better. You now have universal basic income. You don't need to work, but it is a wealth transfer between those different things that are happening. And so the middle class was effectively built upon ownership. "That was the boomers after World wars that were able to get the real estate at an affordable rate. They were able to leverage up the debt. They own the property, they own the businesses, they own the stocks, they have the savings. And AI essentially threatens to separate consumption from ownership. "And that's what I think everyone needs to prepare for. So citizens may consume more, but they'll be owning less if they don't get this trend right, if they don't become the asset owner. "And that is really the universal basic income, or what Elon Musk calls the universal high income. It doesn't solve the problem. It concentrates wealth significantly. That's why I've always said you got to have a plan for the next five, 10 years. Even if it, takes longer, takes shorter, whatever it is, you still got to start working. "I talked about, there was an episode on my blog, SimonDixon(.)com how to develop a 10-year plan, how to understand these different trends. But UBI is effectively consumption support, let's call it what it actually is. "And ownership is wealth creation. And you need to become an owner rather than a consumption supporter. It's going to be the subordination industrial complex, the subscription industrial complex. Basically a monthly payment is not the same as owning the productive assets. You don't get more productive and get ahead unless you get more productive and then own the assets. "And that's why you got to lean into this maximum productivity increase in order to spend less than you earn and invest the difference in the assets. Own more Bitcoin. This month in the sovereign strategy and then diversify accordingly in order to play some of the different things. "Now, remember, the future may become a world where citizens rent access to virtually all sorts of things. And so really, that is the subscription industrial complex. They want you to rent it rather than own the assets, and specifically the assets that are producing it, because that's why they create these manufactured crisis to make sure that you own nothing and you're happy."

MIND-BLOWING 🤯 Angel investor perfectly sums up how the "You Will Own Nothing and Be Happy" strategy is being implemented with UBI, AI, and tokenization "This is the hidden wealth transfer" "Assets are going to become harder and harder to own as a result of AI" "couple that with tokenization, where they won't even let you own the asset" "They want the custodian to own the asset and you to own the token" "AI essentially threatens to separate consumption from ownership" "the universal basic income, or what Elon Musk calls the universal high income, it doesn't solve the problem. It concentrates wealth significantly" "you need to become an owner rather than a consumption supporter" "It's going to be the subordination industrial complex, the subscription industrial complex" "They want you to rent... rather than own the assets, and specifically the assets that are [productive]... that's why they create these manufactured crises to make sure that you own nothing and you're happy" This clip of Simon Dixon (Simon Dixon), an angel investor, Bitcoin OG investor, and former investment banker, is taken from a video posted to the Simon Dixon YouTube channel on June 14, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Assets are going to become harder and harder to own as a result of AI. Now couple that with tokenization, where they won't even let you own the asset. They want the custodian to own the asset and you to own the token. "And you've got these structural paper contracts where they don't want you to own the Bitcoin, they want you to own the paper Bitcoin. So daily life gets cheaper, but ownership gets more expensive. And that's what I think we're witnessing. "That's the trend that I'm looking out for and that's what I think the data is. This is the hidden wealth transfer. So the headlines during this whole thing will say to you, everything's getting cheaper. "AI is making everyone's life better. You now have universal basic income. You don't need to work, but it is a wealth transfer between those different things that are happening. And so the middle class was effectively built upon ownership. "That was the boomers after World wars that were able to get the real estate at an affordable rate. They were able to leverage up the debt. They own the property, they own the businesses, they own the stocks, they have the savings. And AI essentially threatens to separate consumption from ownership. "And that's what I think everyone needs to prepare for. So citizens may consume more, but they'll be owning less if they don't get this trend right, if they don't become the asset owner. "And that is really the universal basic income, or what Elon Musk calls the universal high income. It doesn't solve the problem. It concentrates wealth significantly. That's why I've always said you got to have a plan for the next five, 10 years. Even if it, takes longer, takes shorter, whatever it is, you still got to start working. "I talked about, there was an episode on my blog, SimonDixon(.)com how to develop a 10-year plan, how to understand these different trends. But UBI is effectively consumption support, let's call it what it actually is. "And ownership is wealth creation. And you need to become an owner rather than a consumption supporter. It's going to be the subordination industrial complex, the subscription industrial complex. Basically a monthly payment is not the same as owning the productive assets. You don't get more productive and get ahead unless you get more productive and then own the assets. "And that's why you got to lean into this maximum productivity increase in order to spend less than you earn and invest the difference in the assets. Own more Bitcoin. This month in the sovereign strategy and then diversify accordingly in order to play some of the different things. "Now, remember, the future may become a world where citizens rent access to virtually all sorts of things. And so really, that is the subscription industrial complex. They want you to rent it rather than own the assets, and specifically the assets that are producing it, because that's why they create these manufactured crisis to make sure that you own nothing and you're happy."

Sense Receptor

49,610 просмотров • 1 месяц назад