Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Netflix dropped some useful stuff. VOID -video object and interaction deletion. - removes objects while realistically simulating physical consequences; - beats Runway/ProPainter; - CogVideoX-5B + SAM 2; looks good, no smudges/artifacts

365,564 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Vibe Coding 3D Garment Software with ThreeJS : A Small Step For Me So, after modeling the human i did what any reasonable vibe coder would do, i asked codex how to get clothes for my models After it was done running subliminal ad campaigns for Marvelous Designer and CLO 3D, i asked it to explain their architecture to me and adapt it to my threejs app. Guess what it did? You damn right, it built the most basic shit interpretation you can think of. And this is the average interaction the Anti-AI coders have until they conclude that AI is slop and/or it can only work if you micro manage it on every line of code. Well, eons of humanities knowledge are now packaged in tiny silicon and transferred across the globe in realtime, available on tap. So anyways i just iterated quite a lot over it, told it repeatedly why it was bad (the initial one used rapier physics and a naive cloth simulation) We found out together that: 1. A ground truth document model is needed 2. The visual mesh in 3D should be triangulated from the 2D shape 3. The physical object is running independently through different solvers: - A fast proxy which is generated by reading all the bones in runtime and just inflating these areas with spheres and capsules - A medium quality proxy which resamples the human model and creates a lower-poly mesh for simulations - Full mesh simulation (can't run it, every simulation tick takes about 5 minutes on my machine) It ended the session by telling me that this is still crap because it runs everything on CPU (thanks, not that i care, but i guess we'll be fixing that?) Oh yea also built a 2D canvas editor with boolean operations so i can build cool stuff like ponchos. It also allows me to mark stitches between two objects, which is how the shirt in the video pulls towards the other half. The garment's properties and materials are not yet exposed, yes i know it looks very stiff like a poncho made from a persian rug, we're working on it, okay? So, yea, tbh this is another endless rabbit hole, let's go i guess

robot

38,935 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

This girl gets some of her flirting advice right, but some is very OFF BASE. This is why you have to take dating advice for men that comes from women with a giant grain of salt 🧂 Some of women’s advice may be useful… but some of it will always be MISLEADING. If you are not already savvy enough to tell the difference, you’ll mix in the bad with the good and not know where you’re tripping up. Break down of what is useful vs. what is MISLEADING: ✅ USEFUL: do not open her with “You’re really pretty/beautiful, I wanted to meet you.” She doesn’t know what to say to that; she has also heard it before so many times you sound like a broken record. You can say pretty much ANYTHING other than this (e.g.: “Hey, how’s it going?” This is 10x better than a generic looks-based compliment). ✅ USEFUL: open her with something relevant to the situation. Situationally relevant openers can work great. For instance: “Think we’ll be in line forever?” if you’re waiting in line, or “The art here sure is interesting huh,” if there’s a weird piece of art. 🆇 MISLEADING: you should not expect a girl to take over on your opener, like this girl did with the “cute/sweet” coffee recommendation opener. Most girls are not outgoing enough that they are going to decide to “have a chat” with you immediately on the open. You are the man; you need to EXPECT to drive at least the first 2 minutes of conversation YOURSELF! ✅ USEFUL: “keep the conversation short, sweet, casual, fun”: all that, yes. The initial conversation needs to be light, playful, and engaging. Tease her within the first 30 seconds (that’s how she knows it’s a FLIRTATION and not a platonic chat). Make an observation about her or two (keep it positive and light). Tap her on the forearm on a joke or a high point. SMILE! You want your presence to be a warm, welcome, & flirtatious one. 🆇 MISLEADING: “worst thing you could possibly do is annoy her with your presence”; I mean, YES, BUT you do not need to be thinking about “I’d better not annoy her” when you are talking to girls. If you do, you will play it too safe, act very boring, get into your head, and become uninteresting and un-fun. Instead, just focus on bringing fun and good energy (not ‘avoiding annoyance’). ✅ USEFUL: what she is calling a ‘non-invasive call to action’ (is this chick a marketer? Because this is marketer speak!) we call a ‘soft close’. Yes, soft close her. Easy one-size-fits-all soft close you can use with any girl (say this on a high point): “We should grab a bite or a drink sometime.” As soon as she says “yes”, you have your green light 🟢 to grab her # 🆇 MISLEADING: “give her your number”… this is the WORST piece of advice in the video; even worse than the “don’t annoy her” bit (which will get you in your head doing things wrong). This girl has a wide face, deep voice, and high confidence, so she’s probably higher testosterone and extroverted. Girls like this are go-getters who will chase down guys on their own and make things happen sometimes (hence the “deciding to have a chat” with a guy when she liked his opener). Most women are NOT extroverted high testosterone women who will take charge and make things happen themselves. Most women are PASSIVE. The average girl who is into you will not text you first if you give her your number. She will just look at it, debate whether to text you, think about what she should text, feel self-conscious about it, feel like she shouldn’t be the first one to text, then you will simply never hear from her. You need to get HER number, so YOU can text, not give her YOURS. 🆇 MISLEADING: “sweet and endearing”, sorry to say it and pop anyone’s bubble, but women do not usually hook up with the “sweet and endearing” guys. They think the stuff these guys do is “cute”, like how little children and pets are “cute”, but they do not find them SEXY. You need to be in the lead, taking CHARGE, leading her through an interaction she enjoys, and setting the pace. Do not be “sweet and endearing.” Anyway, this girl seems really cool and it’s neat that she wants to help guys out. Well-meaning women advising you on dating though are some of the most dangerous because they believe what they are saying and just do not KNOW when the advice they’re giving is counterproductive for a man to actually use vs. productive! (That said, positive encouragement for men to approach & flirt is ALWAYS good! So hat tip to her!)

Girls Chase 🏃‍♀️💨

340,369 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

🚨BREAKING: Swedish Treasure Hunter Dennis Asberg (Dennis Asberg) May Have Found a 60 Meter UFO on the Baltic Seafloor (With electromagnetic Anomalies, Right Angles, Corridors And It’s Not Attached To The Seabed Floor Like a Normal Geological Formation!) 🚨 World-class Swedish wreck diver Dennis Åsberg, co-founder of Ocean X, reveals 15 years of data from the Baltic Sea Anomaly–a 60 meter disc-shaped structure at 90 meters depth producing GPS failures, electromagnetic interference, perfect right-angle geometry, and a new 2025 sub-bottom profile suggesting the object is detached from the seabed. His team has retrieved biological material, burned debris, basalt (in a region where it shouldn’t exist), and recorded temperature anomalies approaching 0°C directly over the structure. Åsberg, who has recovered Tsarist submarines, 1600s cognac shipments, and dozens of major wrecks, says this is the most anomalous discovery of his career. 1. The Discovery (2011): On a midnight sonar sweep while hunting a champagne wreck, the team imaged a perfectly round, 60-meter object with sharp edges and a long “track” stretching behind it. No wreck expert in the U.S., Europe, or Australia could identify it. Åsberg went public — and everything changed. 2. Geometry That Shouldn’t Exist: Divers report straight walls, 90° corridors, and a hard, uniform surface. A large circular opening appeared to be pulsing sediment in and out, described as “breathing.” Lab tests on loose samples revealed burned organic material and basalt, despite geologists stating basalt should not occur there naturally. 3. Tech Malfunctions & EM Interference: Multiple expeditions recorded GPS dropouts, dead sonar, failing ROVs, and cameras shutting down only over the object. One reading registered the anomaly like a “high-voltage power line” on the seafloor. Even a modern Stockholm University research vessel experienced equipment interference. 4. Temperature & Biological Oddities: Water temperature around the object plunged from normal 4–5°C to nearly 0°C. The Baltic at that depth is normally dead, yet biological debris was found. A diver with over 6,000 logged dives said he had “never seen anything like it.” 5. New 2025 Evidence — It’s Detached: The latest expedition’s sub-bottom profiling (performed with a university research team) suggests the object is separate from the bedrock, not a geological formation. It is shaped, structured, and resting on the seafloor, not rising out of it. This is the most important data point in 15 years. 6. NATO Ships & Intelligence Interest: After going public, Åsberg’s crew found themselves surrounded by 6–7 NATO vessels — French, German, American, British — plus a Swedish corvette drifting through their dive lines. A later meeting with Swedish intelligence showed officials denying ships were present, despite Åsberg having video evidence. He also had threats made against his family during this time. 7.Almost miraculously, the object has been struck by lightning, a meteor has hit the Baltic Sea right next to it (infantescimally low odds) and smoke appeared coming out of the water above it. All extremely bizarre anomalies adding to the mystery. We show footage of ALL OF THIS. 8. The 1996 Nuclear-Site UFO: Long before the anomaly, Åsberg witnessed a 600–700 meter cigar-shaped craft hovering over a Swedish plutonium facility — silently, at low altitude, rotating to reveal a perfectly circular form before shooting upward and vanishing. The incident anchored his belief that some objects in our world are far beyond conventional explanation. If you want the most detailed, firsthand account of one of the strangest physical UAP mysteries on Earth, one involving sonar data, diver logs, electromagnetic anomalies, and new university-backed analysis, this is the episode. Full Documentary 👇

Jesse Michels

216,562 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Sam Altman just dropped the most important interview of 2025. And buried in it are four numbers that explain why everything you think about AI is wrong. Here's what he revealed: Number 1: AI companies are generating 10 TRILLION tokens per day. Humans? Average 20,000 tokens per day. Sam's exact words: "Models will output more tokens than all of humanity put together. Then 10x that. Then 100x that." We're not talking about AI assisting human work anymore. We're talking about AI replacing the entire volume of human intellectual output on the planet. And most people have no idea this shift already happened. Number 2: OpenAI's enterprise business is CRUSHING consumer. Everyone thinks OpenAI is ChatGPT for normies. Wrong. Sam just revealed: "Enterprise growth OUTPACED consumer growth this year." The API business is growing faster than ChatGPT. Over 1 million enterprise users already. "If we had double the compute, we'd be at double the revenue right now." Translation: OpenAI isn't compute-constrained by technology. They're revenue-constrained by infrastructure. The bottleneck is supply and not demand. Every dollar of compute they add prints money. Number 3: GPT-5.2 beats you at 74% of your job. Sam revealed OpenAI's internal GDP-Val benchmark. It measures how AI performs on knowledge work tasks across 40+ verticals. The results: GPT-5.2 beats or ties expert-level knowledge workers at 74.1% of tasks. Legal analysis. PowerPoint decks. Web apps. Financial modeling. Customer support. Sam's description: "A co-worker you can assign an hour's worth of tasks to and get something you prefer back 3 out of 4 times." Three years ago, ChatGPT launched at basically 0% on this scale. Now it's at 74%. And that's not GPT-6. That's what's available RIGHT NOW. Most companies haven't even started using this yet. But here's what Sam said about the gap between capability and adoption: "The overhang is going to be massive. Most people are still asking similar questions they did in the GPT-4 realm." Translation: The models can do 10x more than people have figured out how to use them for. Which means there's a HUGE arbitrage opportunity. Early adopters who actually integrate this into workflows will dominate their industries before competitors even understand what happened. Number 4: AGI already happened. And nobody noticed. Sam's exact quote: "AGI kind of went whooshing by. We're in this fuzzy period where some people think we have it and some don't." Read that again. The CEO of OpenAI just said AGI might have already arrived and we're arguing about definitions while it's actively replacing knowledge work. He even moved the goalposts. The new benchmark: "Superintelligence" = when AI can be a better president or CEO than any human. Not "as good as." BETTER than. We went from "can AI pass a Turing test" to "can AI run countries better than humans" in 3 years. So what does this actually mean? The AI revolution isn't about chatbots getting smarter. It's about the complete replacement of human intellectual output with machine output. At scale. Across every industry. Faster than anyone's prepared for. And the companies positioning for this RIGHT NOW are the ones printing money. OpenAI's enterprise growth is outpacing consumer because businesses see what's coming. They're not buying "AI tools." They're buying the ability to 10x output without 10x-ing headcount. Sam said they'll triple their compute next year. Then triple it again. Revenue is growing even faster than that. "We have never found a situation where we can't monetize all the compute we have." If he isn't lying then that's literally a printing press. The market still doesn't get it. Everyone's focused on "AI bubble" fears while OpenAI is solving the only problem that matters: turning compute into revenue at a faster rate than they're spending. They're not hoping demand catches up to supply. Demand is already 2x ahead of what they can deliver. Meanwhile, most knowledge workers are still using GPT-4 prompts on GPT-5.2. The capability overhang is massive. The arbitrage window is open. And it's closing fast. If you're running a B2B business and you're not integrating AI at the level Sam just described, you're not "waiting to see how it plays out." You're getting crushed by competitors who already figured it out. The companies that win in 2026 won't be the ones with the best AI. They'll be the ones who understood what Sam just laid out 6 months before everyone else did.

Ricardo

358,610 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Great to hear such kind words from Saagar Enjeti (who pronounced my name right!). I appreciate the coverage both he and Emily Jashinsky did on the hearing. Thank you! I really hope this was video of an anomalous craft but, at this point in time, I'm still skeptical. The full clip (link in replies) is 8:29) H/T: Heather | Nice People Saagar: "I do want to give some credit to some of the people who are saying that this video is not actually showing a UFO. Now again, I will let you make up your mind for yourself. But this actually comes from a guy who I very much respect, Joe Murgia, UfoJoe. Let's put it up here on the screen. Basically, he looked into it. They talk about the Hellfire missile. What he says (I was quoting one of That UFO Podcast's listeners/viewers), specifically, is that, quote, 'Contact occurred, with the missile passing through. The apparent "deflection" was a guidance system searching for a laser spot again, causing control surfaces to thrash. The three "trailing" objects align better with debris or internal components ignited by electrical damage rather than missile fragments. [IR] artifacts are possible but unlikely.' "Let's go to the next part here. And they say, the overall conclusion is that, 'The evidence is most consistent with a slow-moving or stationary balloon carrying an electrical payload, struck by a Hellfire that failed to detonate. Anomalies arise from fuse mechanics,' etc. "I will let others determine the facts, but that was some of the original, kind of, quote 'debunking' that I saw on it. You can make up your minds for yourself, in terms of what it comes from. It was Rep. Eric Burlison, by the way, who is the person who revealed it. And it's one of those where it was presented as received from an independent...from a whistleblower, according to him. But the circumstances are a bit weird. He said he received it without any metadata or any of that. He says independent review is ongoing. "So I do think it's important to at least present the fact that some analysts and others are saying that it could have been a balloon, which they say about all of them. And so, you know, I want to be totally fair about...that's part of the reason independent review is very important. Part of the reason, throwing it to the experts, et cetera, and actually taking this stuff seriously." (I hope we get more people chiming in and sharing their analysis and opinions. I'm not a video analyst so I rely on people who know more than me. Which is mostly everyone.) Saagar: "But nonetheless, it was great to see George Knapp and some of the others there recounting some of their experiences. I do think some of us are still getting very fed up with the fact that it's still so slow moving. I attended the first UFO hearing, what, two years ago, at this point...with Dave Grusch, right? I was there, I was in the room. I thought it was a big moment. I thought something was coming. And then, you know..." (We all thought we were reaching a breaking point, No pun intended. But that hasn't happened.) Saagar: "The NDAA continues to not have some of the UFO disclosure pieces, even though it's been pushed by members of the overall U.S. Senate. So we rely on Rep. Anna Paulina Luna or other people who are making extraordinary accusations. I'm very willing to believe, but we gotta see more evidence, we got to see more stuff come from the government." Emily: "Interesting disagreement playing out on X right now between UfoJoe and Lue Elizondo who, on NewsNation last night, made a very interesting argument. Which is, that the Hellfire missile UFO is evidence of, quote, 'technology that is making our premier missile system completely useless.' And if you're wondering why, in relation to what Saagar just described about the NDAA, why are members of Congress - and even, remember Secretary Marco Rubio as a senator?" Saagar: "Yeah, he was an OG. That's right." Emily: "Why are, quote, 'mainstream' members of Congress interested in getting answers to questions like these? Well, it's because they're seeing videos and hearing analysis from people like Lue, who worked at the Pentagon. You can debate Elizondo, whatever. But saying this is evidence of technology that's making our premier missile system completely useless. Now, UfoJoe disagrees." (I disagree because, to me, it appears that the missile disabled this object. So it accomplished its mission. Others, vehemently disagree. Here's one: ProPixel Video Analysis and Research. And this guy... Then you have MarikvR (anomalous) and Mick West (not anomalous), with opposing views. ~ Emily: "[UfoJoe] says, 'Early on, I agreed. Right now, I do not. I retain the right to change from my mind. Did Lue present any analysis or mention anybody who has done analysis besides the stuff shared on here by us?' But that gets to what Saagar was just saying, which is that, years into this third task force meeting, the bombshells are highly disputed. You know, it's not like this bombshell dropped yesterday, and everybody was like when that New York Times story originally dropped back in, what, 2017?" Saagar: "Oh, yeah, 2017. That's why I'm here, literally. That's the only reason, that's what got me in." Emily: "But we haven't had another moment like that, really." Saagar: "It's been a while. Dave Grusch was very important, I think, as well." Emily: "That's true, that's true." Saagar: "I just gotta see more. And, you know, credit to Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell and George Knapp, and all these guys. They're the ones who are at the vanguard. They're pushing the conversation. They're singularly..." Emily: "Responsibly." Saagar: "They're getting it, responsibly vetted. And that's why I include all of the information. You can make up your mind for yourself. I think more scrutiny, pressure on these, you know, the Democratic, Republican establishment to get the stuff out there is just so vitally important, if you want to get to the truth. "Because at this point, you know, you have Congresswomen and others, people making major accusations. Or allegations. Which I'm totally willing to believe, but we have to see more evidence in the future. That's the number one important thing. So, yeah, call your congressman or senator. Get them to the make sure the NDAA is gonna have that. What's it to them, right? It's like, so low on their priority list that if even twenty people call about it, maybe they'll do something? You never know. You truly never know you."

Joe Murgia

22,075 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

AGI? One day, but not yet. The only AI that works well right now is the one behind the screen [12-17]. But passing the Turing Test [9] behind a screen is easy compared to Real AI for real robots in the real world. No current AI-driven robot could be certified as a plumber [13-17]. Hence, the Turing Test isn't a good measure of intelligence (and neither is IQ). And AGI without mastery of the physical world is no AGI. That’s why I created the TUM CogBotLab for learning robots in 2004 [5], co-founded a company for AI in the physical world in 2014 [6], and had teams at TUM, IDSIA, and now KAUST work towards baby robots [4,10-11,18]. Such soft robots don't just slavishly imitate humans and they don't work by just downloading the web like LLMs/VLMs. No. Instead, they exploit the principles of Artificial Curiosity to improve their neural World Models (two terms I used back in 1990 [1-4]). These robots work with lots of sensors, but only weak actuators, such that they cannot easily harm themselves [18] when they collect useful data by devising and running their own self-invented experiments. Remarkably, since the 1970s, many have made fun of my old goal to build a self-improving AGI smarter than myself and then retire. Recently, however, many have finally started to take this seriously, and now some of them are suddenly TOO optimistic. These people are often blissfully unaware of the remaining challenges we have to solve to achieve Real AI. My 2024 TED talk [15] summarises some of that. REFERENCES (easy to find on the web): [1] J. Schmidhuber. Making the world differentiable: On using fully recurrent self-supervised neural networks (NNs) for dynamic reinforcement learning and planning in non-stationary environments. TR FKI-126-90, TUM, Feb 1990, revised Nov 1990. This paper also introduced artificial curiosity and intrinsic motivation through generative adversarial networks where a generator NN is fighting a predictor NN in a minimax game. [2] J. S. A possibility for implementing curiosity and boredom in model-building neural controllers. In J. A. Meyer and S. W. Wilson, editors, Proc. of the International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animats, pages 222-227. MIT Press/Bradford Books, 1991. Based on [1]. [3] J.S. AI Blog (2020). 1990: Planning & Reinforcement Learning with Recurrent World Models and Artificial Curiosity. Summarising aspects of [1][2] and lots of later papers including [7][8]. [4] J.S. AI Blog (2021): Artificial Curiosity & Creativity Since 1990. Summarising aspects of [1][2] and lots of later papers including [7][8]. [5] J.S. TU Munich CogBotLab for learning robots (2004-2009) [6] NNAISENSE, founded in 2014, for AI in the physical world [7] J.S. (2015). On Learning to Think: Algorithmic Information Theory for Novel Combinations of Reinforcement Learning (RL) Controllers and Recurrent Neural World Models. arXiv 1210.0118. Sec. 5.3 describes an RL prompt engineer which learns to query its model for abstract reasoning and planning and decision making. Today this is called "chain of thought." [8] J.S. (2018). One Big Net For Everything. arXiv 1802.08864. See also patent US11853886B2 and my DeepSeek tweet: DeepSeek uses elements of the 2015 reinforcement learning prompt engineer [7] and its 2018 refinement [8] which collapses the RL machine and world model of [7] into a single net. This uses my neural net distillation procedure of 1991: a distilled chain of thought system. [9] J.S. Turing Oversold. It's not Turing's fault, though. AI Blog (2021, was #1 on Hacker News) [10] J.S. Intelligente Roboter werden vom Leben fasziniert sein. (Intelligent robots will be fascinated by life.) F.A.Z., 2015 [11] J.S. at Falling Walls: The Past, Present and Future of Artificial Intelligence. Scientific American, Observations, 2017. [12] J.S. KI ist eine Riesenchance für Deutschland. (AI is a huge chance for Germany.) F.A.Z., 2018 [13] H. Jones. J.S. Says His Life's Work Won't Lead To Dystopia. Forbes Magazine, 2023. [14] Interview with J.S. Jazzyear, Shanghai, 2024. [15] J.S. TED talk at TED AI Vienna (2024): Why 2042 will be a big year for AI. See the attached video clip. [16] J.S. Baut den KI-gesteuerten Allzweckroboter! (Build the AI-controlled all-purpose robot!) F.A.Z., 2024 [17] J.S. 1995-2025: The Decline of Germany & Japan vs US & China. Can All-Purpose Robots Fuel a Comeback? AI Blog, Jan 2025, based on [16]. [18] M. Alhakami, D. R. Ashley, J. Dunham, Y. Dai, F. Faccio, E. Feron, J. Schmidhuber. Towards an Extremely Robust Baby Robot With Rich Interaction Ability for Advanced Machine Learning Algorithms. Preprint arxiv 2404.08093, 2024.

Jürgen Schmidhuber

72,331 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Just pulled up Olipop's landing page after seeing their ads everywhere lately and I need to break this down because this is one of the cleaner DTC pages I've seen in a while. Here's what's actually happening when you land on this page and why it converts cold Facebook traffic better than 90% of ecom brands right now: 1) The first 3 seconds Before you read a single word, there's a video of the product being poured, fizzing, bubbling and condensation on the can with no voiceover or text overlay. Your brain processes that faster than any headline ever could. You can almost hear the fizz. That's intentional. They're triggering a sensory response before your logical brain even wakes up. Then the headline hits. "A New Kind of Soda." Now that's a category repositioning. They're not saying "healthy soda" or "better soda." They're saying the entire category you grew up with needs a new version and this is it. Sub-headline says high fiber, less sugar. Targets exactly the person who clicked the health-focused ad on Instagram. Message match is perfect. The person who clicked the ad lands here and immediately feels like the page was made for them. 2) The product carousel Most brands mess this up by showing you the product and making you go through three more pages to add it to your cart. Olipop lets you hover over any flavor and an "Add 12 Pack" button appears right there. One click. Done. You never leave the homepage. That little micro-interaction is doing serious conversion work because every extra click you require is a percentage of buyers you lose. They basically short-circuited the whole buying process and most people don't even notice it's happening. Star ratings under every flavor. Smart. You're not waiting until the reviews section at the bottom to see social proof. It's right there next to the product at the exact moment you're deciding what to buy. Then there's the "Limited" and "Out of Stock" tags on certain flavors. This is a psychological move that a lot of brands either don't use or use badly. When you see Shirley Temple is sold out your brain immediately thinks this must be good enough that people are actually buying it. And now you're looking at everything else thinking you better grab it before it's gone too. 3) The retention play At this point you haven't bought yet and they already know some people won't on the first visit. So right here they drop the rewards program section. Trade your email for perks and points. They're not letting you leave empty handed. Either you buy today or you give them your email so they can bring you back. Both outcomes work for them. Then comes the subscription nudge. 15% off. Free shipping. Cancel anytime. Three objections handled in one sentence. 1. Too expensive? 15% off. 2. Annoying to reorder? Free shipping straight to your door. 3. Scared of being locked in? Cancel whenever you want. That's a complete objection removal stack built into what looks like a simple banner. The people who weren't ready to buy a 12-pack today are looking at that and doing the math. 4) The press section Bloomberg. Forbes. BuzzFeed. Mindbody. This section exists for one reason. You clicked an ad from a brand you'd maybe seen once or twice before. You don't fully trust them yet. These logos close that gap in about half a second. It's institutional validation. You don't need to read the articles. Just seeing the logos tells your brain people with real credibility have looked at this and thought it was worth covering. Background behind this section is a high-res macro shot of condensation on the can. Cold. Refreshing. Premium. Even the section design is doing sensory work. 5) The overall lesson What Olipop figured out is that a landing page for Facebook traffic has one job. Close the trust gap between the ad and the purchase as fast as possible without losing the energy the ad created. Every section of this page does exactly that. Sensory hook gets you in. Category positioning tells you what it is. Carousel with inline add to cart removes friction. Social proof and scarcity show demand. Subscription offer removes price and convenience objections. Press section provides institutional trust. By the time you hit the footer you either already bought or you gave them your email. That's not a landing page. That's a conversion machine. If your page isn't doing all of this right now, that's where your revenue is leaking. Not in the ads. In what happens after the click. DM me ‘FUNNEL’ and I'll show you exactly how to build something like this for your brand.

Nick Theriot

26,389 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

VEO 2 by Google DeepMind : MY CHEAT SHEET Alright, so after 500h-ish spent on VEO and giving birth to both "Kitsune" and "Banished", tons of people asked for a making-of. Instead, I decided to give you what I actually know of VEO 2 to this day. Please share! it's made to be spread around! 1/ If you're not using a LLM (Gemini, ChatGPT, whatever), you're doing it wrong. VEO 2 currently has a sweet spot when it comes to prompt length: too short is poor, too long drops information, action, description etc. I did a lot of back and forth to find my sweet spot, but once I got in a place I thought felt right, I used a LLM to help me keep my structure, length, and help me draft actions. I would then spent an extensive amount of time tweaking, iterating, removing words, changing order, adding others, but the draft would come from a LLM and a conversation I built and trained to understand what my structure looked like, what was a success, or a failure. I would also share the prompts working well for further reference, and sharing the failures also for further reference. This would ensure my LLM conversation became a true companion. 2/ Structure, structure, structure Structure is important. Each recipe is different but same as any GenAI text-to something, it looks like the "higher on the prompt has more weight" rule applies. So, in my case I would start by describing the aesthetics I am looking for, time of day, colors, mood, then move to camera, subject, action, and all the rest. Once again, you might have a different experience but what is important is to stick to whatever structure you have as you move forward. Keeping it organized also makes it easier to edit later. 3/ Only describe what you see in the frame If you have a character you want to keep consistent, but you want a close-up on the face for example, your reflex will be to describe the character from head to toe and then mention you want a close-up...It's not that simple. If I tell VEO I want a face close-up but then proceed to describe the character's feet, the close-up mention will be dropped by VEO... Once again, the LLM can help you in this by giving it the instruction to only describe what is in the frame. 4/ Patience Well, it can get costly to be patient, but even if you repeat the same structure, sometimes changing one word can still throw the entire thing out and totally change the aesthetics of your scene. It is by nature extremely consistent if you conserve most words, but sometimes it happens. In those situations, trace your steps back and try to figure out which words are triggering a larger change. 5/ Documenting When I started "Kitsune" (and did the same for all others), the first thing I did was start a Figjam file so I could save the successful prompts and come back to them for future reference. Why Figjam? So I could also upload 1 to 4 generations from this prompt, and browse through them in the future. 6/ VEO is the Midjourney of video Currently, no text-to-video tool (Minimax being the closest behind) gave me a feeling I could provide strong art directions and actually get them. I have been a designer for nearly 20 years, and art direction to me has been one of the strongest foundations of most of my work. Dark, light, happy, sad, colorful or not, it doesn't matter as long as you have a point of view and please...have a point of view. Recently watched a great video about the slow death of art direction in film (link in comments) and oh boy, did VEO 2 deliver on giving me the feeling I was listened. Try starting your prompts with different kinds of medium (watercolor for example), the mood you are trying to achieve, the kind of lighting you want, the dust in the rays of light, etc... which gets me to the next one 7/ You can direct your colors in VEO It's as simple as mentioning the hues you want to have in the final result, in which quantity, and where. When I direct shots, I am constantly describing colors for two reasons: 1. Well, having a point of view and 2. reaching better consistency through text-to-video. If I have a strong and consistent mood but my character is slightly different because of text-to-video, the impact won't be dramatic because a strong art direction helps a lot with consistency. 8/ Describe your life away Some people asked me how I achieved a good consistency between shots knowing it's only text-to-video and the answer is simple: I describe my characters, their unique traits, their clothing, their haircut, etc..anything which could help someone visually impaired have a very precise mental representation of the subject. 9/ But don't describe too much either... It would be magical if you could stuff 3000 words in the window and have exactly what you asked for, right? Well, it turns out VEO is amazing with its prompt adherence, but there is always a moment where it starts dropping animations or visual elements when your prompt stretches for a tad too long. This actually happens way before the character limit allowed by VEO is reached, so don't overdo it, it's no use and will play against the results. For info, 200-250 words seems like a sweet spot! 10/ Natural movements but... VEO is great with natural movements and this is also one of the reasons why I used it so extensively: people walking don't walk in slow-motion. That being said, don't try to be too ambitious on some of the expected movements: multiple camera movements won't work, full 360 revolutions around a subject won't work, anime-style crazy camera movements won't work, etc... what it can do is already great, but there are still some limitations...

Henry Daubrez 🌸💀

30,841 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

If you watch this ~50 minute screen recording closely (yeah, I know, it's long; there are also some times when my computer was very slow and laggy, just skip past that part. And at one point I had to run and get my 9-month-old a new bottle and left it on a boring screen, sorry!), I believe you can see real signs of the kind of runaway, recursive AI self-improvement that people have been warning of for a while (Mr. Kurzweil most notably and prophetically). Why do I say that? What's different now? Well, there's a reason my set of agent coding tooling is called the Flywheel. These tools all mutually self-reinforce each other. And they all flow directly into my ntm tool (short for "named_tmux_manager"), which acts as a sort of integration point and nerve center for the tools (this is becoming more true by the minute as I'm now seriously working on ntm). Now, ntm was something I started making to automate some aspects of my workflow, but it was the kind of thing where, until it was perfect, it sort of just slowed me down. So I didn't actually use it even though I kept working on it and trying to improve it, and suggested to users that they try it in my tutorials. Well anyway, I finally got around to "dogfooding" ntm last night, and now it's going to get very dramatically better at an alarming rate. Some of that is from applying my "idea wizard" prompt to generate more useful features and building that stuff out and addressing obvious pain points I encountered during my newfound usage of the tool. But a lot comes from my realization that, once again, ntm's true utility is not as a tool for ME, but for an agent. That is, ntm lets one instance of Claude Code or Codex act as, well, me, do the things that I had been doing manually. Do I wish I had started using ntm earlier? No, for two big reasons: 1) Doing it manually helped me build up my intuition massively, which directly led me down the path of creating useful prompt strategies and workflows; these often began as ad-hoc prompts that I realized could be generalized and made more versatile/universal. Lesson: don't prematurely automate until you have an intimate, intuitive feel for your "core value-add loop." Otherwise you'll have a fully automated system quickly that efficiently and automatically does a stupid or otherwise sub-optimal thing. 2) My eyes have been opened to the beauty and power of Skills. I'm not talking about your garden-variety skills that are just a simple markdown file. I'm talking about true tour-de-force directories of perfectly structured and organized files that are filled with good information, insights, workflows, etc., but presented in a way that is highly optimized for consumption by AI agents, with extreme attention paid to things like perfect progressive disclosure, token density, agent-ergonomics, agent-intuitiveness, etc. And also Skills that go way beyond markdown files, with full integration into Claude Code where it makes sense via hooks, sub-agents, and even Python scripts. These kinds of skills are a qualitative difference in expressive power and usefulness and a total game changer. They are also effectively composable, creating almost an algebra of skills that let you use them together in powerful ways. I'm working on a subscription service website and CLI tool now to share what I've learned here most effectively, stay tuned for that in the coming days. Anyway, I now know what to make and how to make it. So, getting back to that screen recording, what does it show that makes me claim recursive self-improvement is here? If you keep your eye on the upper left tmux pane, that's the "controller" agent. It is using ntm to control all the other panes which are also running Claude Code (but ntm fully supports other agent types like Codex and Gemini-CLI, and it's trivially easy to mix and match them if you wanted to have, say, 8 CCs and 6 Codexes for writing the code and 3 Gemini-CLIs for reviewing code.) Now, there's nothing that crazy about this much so far. But where it starts to get very cool is that as the session continues and we encounter real-world problems, things like my ridiculously overloaded computer that keeps hanging for long periods, Claude Code instances that crash and get into a frozen, unresponsive state, it can learn from that. And you can see it using my skill writing skill to refine its ntm vibe coding skill in real time. And then take that skill and refine it to be more intuitive for itself. Or use my cass tool skill to search all the session histories to look for problems that came up and strategize how to solve them. The most useful part was when, towards the end of the session, I told it to reflect on all the things we had done and problems we encountered. One way it can usefully leverage those reflections is by improving its ntm vibe coding skill to make it cover more edge cases and exigencies. But the other, more fundamental, way is for it to conceive of and design the optimal new features and functionality for ntm itself so that the tool embodies those lessons in a first-class way. This offloads cognition from its brain onto its tooling, just like how a person can lean on spellcheck or a calculator. It codifies correct, effective reasoning at the tool level, where it's more reliable and robust and repeatable. And btw, did you notice what code base it was working on the whole time? It was none other than ntm itself! So as it worked on its own tool, it had reflections and ideas about how to further improve the tool. Now, it could have just as easily gotten those insights and ideas while using ntm to work on a different project, but the fact that it was working on itself is almost gloriously meta and recursive. So by the end, after learning from tending to a big group of agent workers (btw, I have previously emphasized doing everything in a really distributed/decentralized way, where each fungible agent gets identical marching orders that tell it to use my bv tool to find the optimal bead to work on. This does work very well, but occasionally results in some contention and overlap from thundering herd, or at least wastes time/tokens/communication in avoiding that before the agents waste time duplicating work. But in this new ntm-oriented workflow, I was able to have the controller agent in the upper left use bv itself and then optimally parcel out the instructions to each agent so that we could know for sure that there's no overlap), I ended up with a ton of new beads for new features, which I had it optimize and polish a few times. Now I can swap to a new Claude Max account and have the swarm implement all those new features! It should only take a couple passes like the one shown in the screen recording to get everything implemented. Then we can rinse and repeat, having the agent read through the full session histories of each agent and its experience from its own session in sending ntm commands and seeing how they worked out in practice, to come up with the next batch of changes to both its ntm vibe coding skill AND to the ntm tool itself. Do you see how rapidly this turns into Skynet? My mistake earlier was in focusing on making myself a "faster horse" as Henry Ford used to joke about customers wanting before he showed them what they should really want (a Model T). That is, something that would make my experience nicer while doing this agent swarm based development workflow. But the obvious lesson is that you should make all your tooling agent-first because the agents are just better at this stuff. You can still watch, and of course I did add a ridiculous number of very nice human-centric features to ntm that you'll be seeing in the next day or two, but those are really kind of "for fun" to make us humans feel better about the process. All the real value-add is happening "by agents, for agents." PS: Towards the end, you can see me switch to my Mac and tell Claude to improve the skill that I made earlier today for taking the mkv screen recording files from OBS Studio and muxing them into MP4 files for sharing, while downloading songs from YouTube to serve as the background music. I made it so it can also grab the thumbnails and generate little song credit cards that show up in the lower right corner. This worked perfectly the first time! I'll include some screenshots in a response post showing how that worked, but it was awesome to witness. Skills are POWERFUL. I'll also post a link to this video on YouTube if you prefer to watch it there.

Jeffrey Emanuel

25,483 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

This 6-minute video reveals how Elon Musk learns complex topics: Elon Musk: “You don’t need college for learning.” “Everything is available basically for free. You can learn anything you want for free. It is not a question of learning.” Musk starts with a blunt point: College may still have value, but not for the reason most people think. He says the real signal of college is not intelligence. It is proof that someone can work through structure: “Can somebody work hard at something, including a bunch of sort of annoying homework assignments, and still do their homework assignments, and kind of soldier through and get it done?” That, in his view, is one of the main things a degree demonstrates: Discipline. Compliance. Follow-through. Not necessarily exceptional ability. Musk pushes the idea even further: “Colleges are basically for fun and to prove you can do your chores. But they’re not for learning.” Whether or not you agree with him fully, the underlying point is hard to ignore: We live in a time when knowledge is no longer locked inside institutions. The internet has dismantled the old gatekeeping model. Today, if someone wants to learn design, engineering, writing, sales, coding, marketing, or history, they can access world-class information without ever stepping into a lecture hall. The bottleneck is no longer access to information. It is desire. Focus. Curiosity. Consistency. Musk then draws a distinction that matters: “If you’re trying to do something exceptional, there must be evidence of exceptional ability.” That line changes the whole conversation. Because in real life, people do not reward credentials alone. They reward proof. Not what you enrolled in. What you built. Not what you intended to do. What you finished. Not what you say you know. What you can demonstrate. This is why portfolios outperform claims. Why execution beats prestige. Why visible work creates leverage. Musk even says, somewhat provocatively: “I don’t consider going to college evidence of exceptional ability.” And then he points to the kinds of examples people love to cite: “Gates is a pretty smart guy, he dropped out. John was pretty smart, he dropped out. Larry Ellison, smart guy, he dropped out.” His broader message is not that everyone should leave school. It is that conventional paths are not the only paths to intelligence, capability, or impact. Then Musk moves into something even more useful: His view of how people actually learn. “Education should be as close to a video game as possible. Like a good video game. You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day.” That comparison is simple, but powerful. Why do people obsess over games? Because games are interactive. They are immersive. They provide immediate feedback. They make progress visible. They create challenge without making the challenge feel meaningless. Musk’s point is that learning should work the same way. “If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do.” This is where traditional education often breaks down. Students are expected to move in lockstep. Same pace. Same timeline. Same structure. Same sequence. Musk rejects that model completely: “People are not objects on an assembly line.” That may be one of the clearest criticisms in the entire transcript. Because standard education often optimizes for administration, not human variation. It is easier to manage people in batches. But easier to manage does not mean better to learn. Some people move faster in math. Some are stronger in language. Some are highly visual. Some need to touch the thing, build the thing, test the thing. And yet most systems still treat learning like synchronized marching. Musk argues for something more individualized: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in in each subject.” That idea matters beyond school. Adults learn this way too. No one becomes exceptional by waiting for permission to move at average speed. The most effective learners usually follow interest with intensity. They go deeper where curiosity pulls them. They accelerate where energy is highest. They build momentum through engagement, not force. Musk also shares one of the most practical ideas in the transcript: “Teach problem solving, or teach to the problem, not to the tools.” Then he gives an example. If you wanted to teach someone how engines work, the traditional system might start with separate lessons on screwdrivers, wrenches, and tools. Musk thinks that is backwards. A better method is: “Here’s the engine. Now let’s take it apart.” Then the tools become relevant in context. Now the student understands *why* the screwdriver matters. Now the wrench has meaning. Now the lesson is connected to reality. This is a much bigger principle than education. People learn faster when relevance is obvious. Abstract instruction is forgettable. Applied learning sticks. When people can see the problem first, they care about the tool. That is true in business too. You do not start with theory for theory’s sake. You start with the problem that needs solving. Then you learn exactly what is required to solve it. Finally, Musk says something that quietly explains why so much education fails: “A lot of things people learn, probably there’s no point in learning them because they never use them in the future.” That may sound harsh, but most people know the feeling. They do not resist learning because they are lazy. They resist learning because it feels disconnected. They are told to memorize before they understand relevance. They are told to sit still before they become curious. They are told to absorb information before they have any reason to care. Musk’s view, underneath the provocation, is actually simple: People learn best when learning is alive. When it is tied to action. When it respects differences in pace and aptitude. When it feels engaging instead of ceremonial. When it produces visible competence, not just paper credentials. The internet made learning abundant. What matters now is whether someone can turn information into evidence. That is the real separator. Lessons I'm taking away from this clip: 1. In today’s world, access to knowledge is cheap. Proof of skill is expensive. We have crossed a point where information alone is no longer impressive because everyone has access to it. You can watch the best interviews, read the best essays, take the best online lessons, and still remain average if you never turn any of it into real work. So the advantage now is not “I know this.” The advantage is “I built this, tested this, shipped this, and can show the result.” From my perspective, this is especially true in business and personal branding. The market rewards visible competence far more than silent knowledge. 2. People learn faster when the learning feels useful, alive, and connected to a real problem. This is why so many people struggle with conventional education but thrive when they start building something for themselves. Urgency creates focus. Relevance creates retention. Once the lesson is attached to a real outcome, the brain pays attention differently. That’s why I think one of the best ways to learn anything is to start a project that forces you to use the skill in public or in real life. Learning becomes sharper when there is something at stake. It stops being passive consumption and becomes active problem-solving. 3. The smartest people are often not the ones collecting credentials. They are the ones following curiosity with discipline. Exceptional people usually do not just learn what is assigned to them. They go where their interest is strongest and then they pursue it seriously. That combination matters: curiosity without discipline goes nowhere, and discipline without curiosity becomes lifeless. The sweet spot is when someone becomes obsessed enough to keep going deeper than required. To me, that is where the real edge comes from. Not from following the default path better than everyone else, but from developing uncommon depth in something that genuinely pulls you.

Yasmine Khosrowshahi

34,166 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

what is "retail" and what can be today? it's wild how little attention this space gets tbh retail isn't just about profit margins & sales conversions - it's this fascinating bridge between innovation culture & everyday life, especially in design and fashion but nobody's really cracked it for virtual spaces yet all the worlds by dolce gabbana and others are like a very low effort interfaces that dont talk enough to the real user, it is a marketing move to say we did that, we follow tech bla bla (imo :) spent months researching traditional retail spaces - marble floors + high ceilings + that specific type of lighting that makes everything look expensive + trained staff in perfectly pressed + ironed uniforms - it's all carefully orchestrated then you've got these sleek 2d websites - full screen product shots + bold typography + minimal clicks to checkout - they work but something's missing, that human element that makes physical retail special started building this hybrid concept back in october 23 - imagine a web-based spatial store where your digital twin can actually try stuff on instantly - no more guessing if that jacket fits your avatar retail spaces are like these sacred temples of brand culture - acne stores hit different than zara ones & that's intentional - each space tells a story about what the brand believes in metaverse retail flips this whole concept - instead of walking 20 mins to a store you're literally one click away from being inside this carefully crafted virtual environment - ai npcs that actually understand fashion & can help you find exactly what you're looking for here's the thing about virtual retail - it's not just about pushing products - created this space where you can just vibe, test out avatars, play with different looks - if you buy something cool but the experience matters more. feeling same for the stores, new gen irl stores switched the narrative to a spaces where you can have an espresso and chill these ai npcs are different - they're not following you around like those overeager sales assistants - they're just chilling in the space, ready to help if you need them but totally cool if you just want to explore went through like 12 different iterations of interior design thru 3 years - each version taught something new about how people interact with virtual fashion - it's wild how much user behavior in virtual spaces differs from physical retail realized something big during development - creating the collection isn't even half the battle anymore - the way you present it, the whole experience around it, that's become this massive design challenge it's like gesamtkunstwerk but for the metaverse - every single element needs to be intentional - the lighting, the sound design, the way avatars move through the space - it all matters built this whole ecosystem around the concept - the store connects to the runway experience connects to the website connects to the marketplace - everything flows together serving this bigger vision of what virtual fashion can be this isn't just about selling digital clothes - it's about creating this accessible gateway into 3d internet culture - making virtual fashion something that actually makes sense in people's daily digital lives the lighting system alone took a month - because shadows & reflections hit different in virtual space - needed to make materials look good but also render fast enough for smooth experience on todays low gpu vr machine devices future of retail isn't physical or digital - it's this wild hybrid space where real & virtual blend together - imagine walking into a physical store & seeing your virtual wardrobe projected onto your reflection looking at the data now - users spend avg 23 mins in the virtual store compared to 7 mins on traditional e-commerce sites - they're not just shopping, they're exploring & connecting with the brand story accessibility was key in design - wanted anyone with a decent internet connection to access this space - no fancy vr gear required just your browser & imagination each virtual store could visit generates this unique experience - in future, the space can remember your preferences but also introduces new elements each time - keeps the discovery feeling fresh what's wild is how this changes the whole fashion calendar - virtual retail spaces can transform instantly - new collection drops can completely reshape the environment in seconds - no more seasonal renovations, change the glb. looking ahead this could revolutionize how we think about brand spaces - why limit yourself to physics when your store could literally defy gravity - imagine trying on a jacket while floating through a nebula retail in metaverse isn't just about replicating physical stores - it's about creating these impossible spaces that still somehow feel familiar & welcoming - that's the sweet spot we're all chasing built this thinking about the next wave of digital natives - they're gonna expect these kinds of hybrid experiences - traditional e-commerce gonna feel as outdated as catalog shopping feels to us now the tech's finally catching up to the vision - webgl performance + ai integration + virtual try-on tech all hitting that sweet spot where imagination meets practicality all my thoughts here are quite alpha in sense of applying today, was able to apply only some of them thanks to hyperfy, but the vision is here. breathe it. now with v2, all of these thoughts can be applied and developped. this is just the beginning tbh - every problem solved opens up new possibilities - excited to see how others build on these concepts & push virtual retail even further. fubu side note: made an ai gen notorious big song for it, enjoyy.

decentralize*

12,505 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

My cousin, Jonathan Ord asked me to teach the Come Follow Me lesson to his mission yesterday over zoom. This is the video I did and the full text. Hi. I am Brad Smith. I have ALS, which is a really weird disease that kills the motor neurons in my body. That means that I lose the connections between my brain and my muscles. My mind is still running at the normal rate. So, I can understand everything you say to me, but I can’t respond very quickly! I am getting faster, though. Last November I was the 3rd person in the world to receive the Neuralink brain implant. So I am controlling this computer with my brain. This is my old voice, recreated by AI from just two hours of me talking to my phone. I have come to see ALS as a calling, and I am trying to magnify it. I used to talk easily, but now I have to choose my words carefully, because it is hard and slow to type what I want to say. I joke that the Lord gave me ALS to get me to shut up. Those who knew me when I could talk laugh the hardest. President Ord is my first cousin. So we share grandma and grandpa Smith. Our grandma Smith was a character. When she taught at church, she would put a sign up that read: “thus saith the lord:” so I will try to keep this within what the Lord has actually said, while trying to teach you to look at a basic principle of the gospel in a different way. Ironically, the first verse of Doctrine & Covenants 93 starts with “Verily, thus saith the Lord”. This is an amazing section of scripture, Jesus Christ telling us to step up and be better! You should study it often. I will start with a story. I asked AI to make a video to dramatically tell the story. During college, I lived in Damascus, Syria, for a semester. It was a fantastic and wonderful experience. I especially loved exploring the Old City of Damascus. The Old City is built around the huge beautiful Umayyad mosque. Within the walls of the old city is a maze of narrow, winding, confusing streets and one really long straight street, as Saul found out in Acts 9:11. One day when a group of us were trying to get through this maze from the mosque to the Christian quarter of the Old City, we asked a man for directions. He thought for a second, then pointed and said, “Go left and then right, and then left and then right, and then left and then right, and then left and right, and you’ll be there.” Aren’t those the most ridiculous directions you have ever heard? We could have ignored him. But, we thought, he did know the city better than we did. So, with some laughter, off we went. Left. Right. Left. Right. And so on until, much to our surprise, we popped out at our destination. Life is a confusing maze. We face difficult choices, unexpected events, surprises, sorrows, opportunities, roadblocks. The Lord has given directions on how to get through to where we want to go. Sometimes the Lord’s directions seem odd, and we may struggle with the decision to follow. The Lord will not force us. It is our choice whether to choose and follow him. Wasn’t that fun? AI is getting crazy! I will be much less entertaining for the rest, but hopefully the spirit will teach you something new. The phrase “keep the commandments” (or “keepeth my commandments”) appears at least 4 times in Doctrine and Covenants Section 93, in verses 1, 20, 27, and 28. There are other references, like “keep my sayings” in 52 and “obeyeth my voice” in 1. So, commandments are really important in this Revelation. I suggest that making the gospel a more central part of our lives depends largely on how we look at commandments. When you think of commandments, do you think “I can’t. I’m Mormon”? (That was a popular T-shirt slogan during my college years.) Although, with the recent guidance from President Nelson, it probably should be “I can’t, I’m a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”. It’s a common reaction: “Thou shalt not do Cool Things.” People LOVE to focus on all the things we CAN’T do, as if we are trapped and deserve pity for our beliefs. No pity is needed. Commandments are opportunities, not constraints. Commandments are awesome! Allow me to illustrate. Imagine a spectrum between Good and Evil. Somewhere in the middle is “the Line” that divides Good from Evil. As a teenager, I wanted to know where the Line was, so I could get close to it without going over it. I wanted to be on the “Good” side but still be able to do as many “Cool Things" with my friends as possible. From my experience, I believe God gives us two types of commandments: 1) Get Back over the Line commandments and 2) Come Further into the Light commandments. Type 1, the Get Back over the Line commandments, could also be called “Misery Avoidance” commandments. They are designed to keep us out of misery or, if we’ve crossed the Line, to bring us out of misery and back into the Good side. These are generally commandments with a clear and defined point of success, such as “Thou shalt not kill.” You will know, at the end of each day, whether you have successfully followed that commandment. I think all of the Ten Commandments fall into this category. The law of Moses was very black and white. The children of Israel had been in Egypt without a prophet for a long time when Moses received the law, and they needed to work on the basics. So, if you follow the Type 1 commandments, you will refrain from doing things that make you miserable. You will know you are in the Good if you can answer the baptismal interview and temple recommend questions honestly and faithfully. If you can do that, you have taken the basic steps necessary to avoid misery and are on a solid foundation for the next type of commandment. Type 2, the “Come Further into the Light” commandments, are the really cool commandments. Once we are out of the misery category, we can really start to pursue joy. So, God commands us to do things that he knows will make us happier and more like Christ. These commandments are the principles of eternal development, such as “Love thy neighbor” (Matthew 22:39). There is no clear end to loving our neighbor—it requires positive and eternal progression. We can always love more, and we can always find another neighbor who needs our love. It is an eternal principle taught by Jesus Christ. And if we truly love our neighbor, refraining from killing him becomes pretty easy. It is through these commandments that we find joy in Jesus Christ. Elder Christofferson taught about this spectrum in the October 2018 general conference: “Most of us find ourselves at this moment on a continuum between a socially motivated participation in gospel rituals on the one hand and a fully developed, Christlike commitment to the will of God on the other. Somewhere along that continuum, the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ enters into our heart and takes possession of our soul. It may not happen in an instant, but we should all be moving toward that blessed state.” Our goal is to go THAT WAY (toward Christ) as much as possible. So first, get back across the line and stop doing things that will make you miserable. Then make every effort to try and be like Jesus, to “love one another as Jesus loves you.” The gospel of Jesus Christ is more than just “not doing” stuff. It is about coming unto Christ, being perfected in him, and denying ourselves of all ungodliness. Discuss with your companion what commandments and mission rules are for “Misery Avoidance” and which are “Come Further into the Light”! And, remember, commandments are ALWAYS connected to huge blessings. The Lord promised, “There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—and when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated” (Doctrine and Covenants 130:20–21). Whenever we obey any of God’s commandments, we will get the blessing associated with that commandment. Elder David A. Bednar said: “The gospel of Jesus Christ encompasses much more than avoiding, overcoming, and being cleansed from sin and the bad influences in our lives; it also essentially entails doing good, being good, and becoming better. Repenting of our sins and seeking forgiveness are spiritually necessary, and we must always do so. But remission of sin is not the only or even the ultimate purpose of the gospel. To have our hearts changed by the Holy Spirit such that “we have no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually” (Mosiah 5:2), as did King Benjamin’s people, is the covenant responsibility we have accepted. “This mighty change is not simply the result of working harder or developing greater individual discipline. Rather, it is the consequence of a fundamental change in our desires, our motives, and our natures made possible through the Atonement of Christ the Lord. Our spiritual purpose is to overcome both sin and the desire to sin, both the taint and the tyranny of sin.” I LOVE this concept—and as I have paid attention, I feel like apostles are trying to teach us this all the time. Are we listening? Let me repeat what Elder Bednar said. He said that the commandments help us change what we WANT. Why is that important? Remember my teenage desires? I wanted to be as close to the line as possible so I could still look cool for my friends. That is a good example of the “tyranny” of sin. Even though I was not actually sinning (probably because I was afraid of my mother), I still had some small desire to sin. I said, “I can’t. I’m Mormon” with many dramatic sighs. Overcoming the tyranny of sin is getting to the point where the sin no longer looks remotely interesting or fun because we are too busy loving our neighbors and trying to be like Jesus. Elder Dallin H. Oaks said: “The Final Judgment is not just an evaluation of a sum total of good and evil acts—what we have done. It is an acknowledgment of the final effect of our acts and thoughts—what we have become. It is not enough for anyone just to go through the motions. The commandments, ordinances, and covenants of the gospel are not a list of deposits required to be made in some heavenly account. The gospel of Jesus Christ is a plan that shows us how to become what our Heavenly Father desires us to become.” This talk was given when I was on a mission, before most of you were born. It completely changed my perspective on the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is called The Challenge to Become” and I recommend that you study it. When the Lord says keep the commandments, he isn’t just telling us to stop sinning—he wants us to become like Christ and to have joy. Take a moment and think, Where am I on this continuum? Remember that none of us is perfect like the Savior, and we all need to lift one another. That is why we worship together. That is why we have priesthood quorums and the Relief Society, Primary, and youth organizations. The Lord taught us that truth when he said we all have different gifts: “To some is given one [gift], and to some is given another [gift], that all may be profited thereby. To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful” (Doctrine and Covenants 46:12–14). The Savior is still WAY over there: a thousand miles away somewhere. That is why we have quorums. We all have a long way to go. Let’s link arms and run together. Let me finish by telling a story from my mission to support my testimony of Jesus. Years ago my mission president said something interesting: “Either the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is truly the kingdom of god on the earth... or it is the greatest fraud ever in history.“ It is audacious to claim to be the true Church of Jesus Christ—but let me explain exactly why I know that to be true. I always BELIEVED that I was raised in the gospel of Jesus Christ. My parents taught me well and I felt good following the commandments and studying the scriptures. That led me to serve a mission in Brazil. My turning point of testimony came when I was 20–at least 2/3rds through my mission. We were invited into a house in the “fundos” of a property—a small structure built behind a larger house. The man was polite and allowed us to share our message. As I had done hundreds of times, I shared the story of Joseph Smith, a boy who sought the truth through prayer. I recited Joseph’s own words in response to his prayer: “I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me... When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" I felt the strongest feeling I had ever experienced—an undeniable confirmation that what I said was true. It hit me in a way I can never forget! I knew that Joseph Smith was truly a prophet, and therefore the Book of Mormon was the word of god. What about the man we were teaching? How had he responded to my life-affirming spiritual experience? He shrugged and politely thanked us for the message. I was stunned. I felt like the windows of heaven opened on me—and he felt nothing. I learned that receiving answers to our prayers is like tuning a radio: not everyone is on the right frequency. For some reason, the Lord decided to broadcast on my frequency that day. I received the undeniable confirmation that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true. I have built on that foundation brick by brick since then. And every time someone has challenged me on Joseph Smith, I go back to that day in Brazil. I know that he was a prophet. My life has been blessed in ridiculously good ways since then. As I have tried to follow Jesus Christ, great things have happened to me. Even my hardest and most frustrating times have turned out to have a purpose. God has upturned my best laid plans over and over. But I look back and realize that I could never have planned any better. With the prophet Nephi I say: “I know that [God] loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things." (1 Nephi 11:17) When I say that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true, that does not mean we have a monopoly on truth. I know Christians and Muslims who teach me to be better—and Members of the church who are far from disciples of Christ. We just have more truth: scriptures, living prophets, ordinances, personal revelation, and answers to many of life’s biggest questions! That is pretty cool. But we can’t be prideful about the truth we have. You have all probably met people to admire both inside and outside of the church. So, I am all in. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true—not a big fraud. And we are all trying to get closer to Christ. I know that Heavenly Father has a plan for me. Life has not been what I expected, but I trust him! I know that Joseph Smith is a prophet of Jesus Christ and that the Book of Mormon is true. This is “intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth. Light and truth forsake that evil one.” With that knowledge, keep the commandments! In the name of Jesus Christ, amen .

Bradford G Smith (Brad)

20,383 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

"I have graphs, I've looked at the Google Analytics, the data does not lie. Every single time, starting in April 2024, that Jen McCabe would become the subject of public attention --It happens at specific discrete moments on the timeline-- you see a bump in the attention paid to Lindsey Gaetani." "And there's no doubt in my mind that Brian Tully's MSP unit --when they had Michael Morrissey make that video, when McCabe's friends or family or whatever, when they all got him to make that video, and that didn't work, and when Morrissey had to recuse, when things got so bad that they had no other out, and the TurtleRiders would not pay attention to anyone but those Karen Read and John O'Keefe witnesses-- Tully, Kate Peter and their people said, "all right, we're left with no other option. Lindsey Gaetani looks like a good distraction. Let's release her phone." And then that cycle repeated over and over and over and over again. And Lindsey's not the only one who's been subject to this. You wanna talk about what's going on to Estey? Even what's going on with Deanna? With Meredith?" TRANSCRIPT: And people wonder why I get so passionate about this. This is nothing I haven't talked about before, but you are not gonna tell me, me, of all people --I'm not gonna speak for Lindsey-- but you are not gonna tell me that the release of Lindsey Gaetani's cell phone extraction did not have serious, serious ramifications. Like, I can't even conceptualize what the impact was on Lindsey and her family's life. I don't think my life was ever the same again after April of 2024. As traumatized as I was from that December 2023 court hearing, what happened in April of 2024 was the worst thing that I have ever seen happen to any human being in my entire life. [Speaking to chat] Oh, hi Lindsey, how are you? I've just never seen anything that horrific, the leak of that cell phone extraction, the impact that it had, the fact that no one even understood how severe it was because people were so distracted by the polemics of it. People were so "excited" to be able to smear Lindsey and the distraction was so powerful that no one asked, one, why did this happen? Or two, what was the impact? And that's what really got me so passionate and furious about this. It wasn't an issue of substantive guilt or innocence about anyone. It was that I was seeing the same exact stuff happen in this situation to people without political connections that I saw happen to the staff of the CCC when really powerful men started getting very, very, very close to each other in positions of power and then when they would do bad things to women, they would just talk to each other. One guy would run the HR department, the other guy would run the executive director position, and somebody else would have a connection to the appointing authority. And so any complaint would just be what's called "caught and killed." And I said, there is no way that this is gonna happen again. When it was happening in the CCC, it was an administrative regulatory agency. At least there was some sort of semblance of check and balance. It wasn't egregious because everyone had a lot of influence, even the people who were staffers. This situation, we had state police officers, people who, if you were listening to the just the narrative of the people who were supporting the Justice for John O'Keefe movement, you would think that Michael Proctor's infallible. You would think Brian Tully's infallible. You would think Kate Peter's infallible, which means incapable of fault. That's nonsense. I'm telling you right now, that's nonsense, and that's why it was so easy for this stuff to manifest. And that's why I became so personally concerned. Forget about what developed from April to April of 2024 until now. That's why I was so upset because I watched what happened from December of 2023 through to April of 2024. And that enough was so egregious, so wrong, such an abuse of trust, such an abuse of the justice system that I said, there is no way that I can just stand by and be apathetic about this, no matter what the price, no matter what the obstacles, no matter what the pressures. And I can't tell you how bad it was --it tore families apart, these cases-- if you didn't live through it. It tore communities apart. I don't believe anyone in Massachusetts around this area, 128 or Dedham or whatever, was able to live a life that was not impacted in some way by this case. Okay, these cases, the TurtleBoy case, Karen Read case, et cetera, et cetera. It frustrates me to no end that somehow within that high-profile situation, there were people who started to control the narrative because they had things to hide. And that's why I started this space, because I truly believe that the real secrets lying beneath what was really going on with Michael Proctor and Brian Tully and Kate Peter and the PI, Marty Kraft and Jen McCabe and Yuri Bukhenik and John Fanning and Nick Guarino. What I really believe was going on was that they were worried that the attention brought onto that unit by the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case was gonna spill their secrets about Birchmore. And it led them to double down and commit even more egregious acts in the context of some of this other behavior, like leaking Lindsey Gaetani's cell phone extraction. And that's, again, you wanna talk about the timeline from April 2024 until now, we can do that too. But what I'll tell you is the story ends up being the same. I have graphs, I've looked at the Google Analytics, the data does not lie. Every single time starting in April 2024, that Jen McCabe would become the subject of public attention. It happens at specific, specific discrete moments on the timeline. You see a bump in the attention paid to Lindsey. And there's no doubt in my mind that this unit, when they had Michael Morrissey make that video, when McCabe's friends or family or whatever, when they all got him to make that video, and that didn't work. When Morrissey had to recuse, when things got so bad that they had no other out and the TurtleRiders would not pay attention to anyone but those Karen Read and John O'Keefe witnesses, Tully and his people said, "all right, we're left with no other option. Lindsey Gaetani looks like a good distraction. Let's release her phone." And then that cycle repeated over and over and over and over again. And Lindsey's not the only one who's been subject to this. You wanna talk about what's going on to Estey? Even what's going on with Deanna? With Meredith? What's going on with a lot of these people, right? There were PIs and moles in the internet saying that Lindsey was that and separating that. There were PIs, moles and various people in the end, just sort of people who were trying to either support Karen or support a movement that they could believe in or whatever it was, who got exploited, who got ran by various people for intel purposes to feed information back to their various handlers. And when they became expendable, they got burned. You watch, look at these emails sent to all these people's schools, the mass emails. That can't be a coincidence. Whoever it benefits can't be a coincidence, all right? It's a coordinated tactic. It's designed to put public attention on very specific people when otherwise damaging information gets released. And what have we seen over the past, let's say from April 2024 until now, what have we seen? That over and over and over again, all right? Every time something would happen, there'd be a new distraction. And then as we got through the end of the Karen Read and John O'Keefe case, what did we see? Yes, there were some real, real secrets lying beneath in terms of this case. And I mean it, I mean it with every bone and fiber in my towel body. There were secrets about the Birchmore case. There were secrets about that phone extraction. There were secrets about the inside baseball and the communications between Tully and Kate and Tully and Jen McCabe and Michael Morrissey and Kate and Michael Morrissey and Jen McCabe. And as it all started to come out and as it crescendoed folks over the past few months to the point where Michael Proctor's own attorney was basically making misrepresentations to the court about the existence of 12 years of cell phone records. When he had Kate Peter deleting evidence from Google Drives that were submitted as formal records to grand juries in the Kearney proceedings. When you have a special prosecutor statute that is so broken, it allows a DA rather than complying with the court order to appoint a new special prosecutor to just no-cross cases. So that stuff like what we've been talking about doesn't come out. It's indefensible. But what is the karmic justice here? It is that for whatever reason, Michael Proctor's cell phone records which I truly believe were captured and swept up by the feds during their federal probe of either Farwell or Tully's unit or John O'Keefe's death, whatever it was, exposing a lot of this. It's not just the Rule 14 discovery related to Kate Peter and otherwise and Tully that was turned over in the Aidan Kearney case, the 5,000 pages of material. Initially 4,000 pages of it was mysteriously just blank. It's not just that folks. It's also the, hey, Michael Proctor's cell phone until months ago, August of 2025 was hidden from the public. It was hidden from criminal defendants until someone somewhere must have informed Michael Proctor that a full copy of that cell phone already existed so there was no point in him continuing to hide it. What does this speak to? Well, it speaks to why I started this space today because in light of everything I just laid out from memory. I wanted to see if there was a single person who would be willing to stand up here and defend Michael Proctor's state police unit, Ryan Tully, John Fanning, Yuri Bukhenik, any of them or Kate Peter or Jen McCabe. Not because of their actions necessarily in the John O'Keefe and Karen Read case but because of everything I just laid out and the silence would let it speak volumes because how are you possibly going to counter any of that? This is what I'm doing from memory sitting here while trying to challenge people to a debate. That is just a part of the historical record. I cannot put into words how much more expansive in scope some of this story is and it's not any one person's story to tell. Let me also go on a rant about this. I'm getting so frustrated with the possessive approach that some people take to some of this coverage. Do you care about what was done to the most vulnerable? I don't care if you think of Karen as vulnerable, Lindsey is vulnerable, Sandra Birchmore is vulnerable, whoever you think of as vulnerable. Do you care about what happened to them? Do you care about righting the wrongs? Do you care about actually talking about the misconduct or are you trying to make a polemical point in furtherance of some specific platform that either you run or you support? What are you trying to accomplish? And I think a lot of us recently have been forced to have some very difficult moral reckoning. Okay, because a lot of us were tricked. I felt absolutely tricked into supporting Michael Proctor. If I knew, I'm not saying about the merits of the John O'Keefe investigation. If I knew then, back in 2023, 2024, what I know now about what's on that phone and about what that unit was willing to do, I never would have supported them. We supported Lindsey, but I never would have supported that unit. I'm sorry. Nope, never would have done it. And that's why I want to talk about people became very possessive about coverage of this case. Reporters are supposed to fade into the background. It's not supposed to be about us. Yes, maybe you have some skills. The reporter, people are interested. You use those skills to get a following so you can tell a story and get the facts out there, but it's not supposed to be about us. If a reporter is the centerpiece of a story, they have failed. Okay, you just blend in the background. We make sure that the people who are the most harmed, their voices are centered. And then we make sure these predatory vultures, like Kate Peter, are unable to manipulate public narratives to protect entrenched systemic power structures. That's what it's all about. So for me, that's why I get so frustrated. That's why I wanted to do this space because I wanted to make a point that when forced to actually debate on merit, all the propaganda mouthpieces will run from the chance. They're happy to get up and shit talk other people when it's a space they control, and they don't have to address the merits. But you put them in a position where they don't control the space and they're forced to debate on merit and they'll run from it. So in some sense, I made my point. But I also think it's an important exercise in telling this story, in explaining where I'm coming from. I think there are a lot of us that are all coming to the same position, which is it doesn't matter what various camp we may have been in or what not. We're not defined by that. We are just individual humans who have a bunch of views on different cases. And at the end of the day, a lot of us, more so, I think than people realize, actually care about systemic reform. We're not in it to protect Kate Peter or Jen McCabe or Brian Tully or anybody. We're here to hold people to equal standards and ask that the justice system do the same. And I think that's a noble goal. That's something that I can believe in. I wish people would be willing to debate it, though. It frustrates me. It really frustrates me. And, you know, maybe that's the nature of it. Maybe it's that making this point requires showing the litany of evidence, showing the sort of timeline, showing the overlapping concentric social circles, talking about these people, talking about what they did, talking about the implications, talking about where this is going. That's what cuts out the propaganda. To me, everyone is capable of fault. I said this the other day. If there are people out there in your orbit who are telling you that they are incapable of fault, they're a threat to the United States. They're the most dangerous, pernicious force we can imagine. Everyone's capable of fault. And we should look to the people who, in spite of their faults, try to leave the world a better place than what they found when they arrived. I think there are those of us. In spite of absolutely inculcating incredible odds who have somehow managed to get to a point where we've centered the voices, we're not there yet, where we're centering the voices who are actually impacted by all this. And if that happens, mark my words, it will not be because of any large media platforms or networks or anything. It will be in spite of them. It will be in spite of their impact inside dealing in spite of the documentary contracts, in spite of the news networks. It will be because a small group of well-meaning people were willing to band together and say, everything else aside, we can stand behind what's right. It may not be a form of right that we all agree on, but starting from that place, instead of from a place of hatred or otherwise, is a good step. I don't know where this is going. I don't know where it's going. I know that no one will stand up here and defend Kate Peter and Brian Tully, at least in a debate with me where I control the playing field. Can you blame them? But I don't know where this is going. You're on my prediction. As someone who's, I think I've not lived this as much as some other people, but I've lived it a lot. It's been a lot. And I'm never gonna understand the impact that this had on the people who had directly impacted, but it's been a lot on a lot of people. The story has impacted many lives. Even myself, with the perspective I have, kind of sitting back here on my veranda, you can call me Thomas Jefferson Towel. I don't have any hemp though, or do I? Sitting on my veranda, kind of looking forward, right here, all right? I got my public records request back today. I know when a public records request denial is like, oh, we want to stonewall this because there's something there. And I'm getting that vibe related to the contacts between the Norfolk DA's office and the Mass AGO's office between September 25th and October 24th of 2025 related to whether the Norfolk DA reached out to appoint a new special prosecutor in the Lindsey Gaetani and Aidan Kearney cases. But as I'm sitting here on my veranda with my eyes closed, I don't have a veranda. I have a desk. I'm a little towel. As I'm sitting here with my eyes closed, I can see the future materializing, okay? There's only certain roads that this can go down. There are only so many pathways left. There's a reckoning coming, folks. Whether it's a reckoning by way of the Sandra Birchmore cover-up, whether it's a reckoning by way of Michael Proctor's attempt to hide a substantial amount of evidence across a substantial number of criminal cases, whether it's related to Kate Peter's involvement in the handling of evidence in the still remaining Aidan Kearney cases. You can sense the anticipation. You can sense the apprehension and anxiety. And you can sense imminent closure. I'm not saying that is gonna be an easy process. I'm not saying it's gonna be a short process. But I'm saying there's something in the air. It's undeniable. There's little left to defend. There's not a single person, troll or otherwise anonymous account or whatever, who would stand up here today right now and with me and try to defend Kate Peter and Brian Tully. I gave you the chance. There's a time, if I had done this space a year ago, oh, people would have been jumping at the bit. No one will do it. No one. Why? Because we're at the end of the road. What Proctor did was indefensible, not in the Read O'Keefe case, although he should never have used those words about Karen. I'd critique him if he was a private citizen, although obviously I'm protective of women, right? But say what you will about that. I wouldn't use those words in private. That man used them in his capacity as a police officer. Right? Not to mention the other defendants' cases that were impacted by whatever Proctor and Sean Goode and whoever else was on that text chain and whatever else is on that phone is gonna lead to. You can sense it. You can sense the reckoning coming. The question is, back to Watergate in the '70s, there was a member of the House of Representatives during the impeachment hearings in '74. We had a very famous phrase. "What did the President know and when did he know?" Folks, the phrase of our era will be, "What did Michael Morrissey know and when did he know it?" This cannot start and end with justice for any single person involved in this. This is not about any one person at this point. This is about a system of justice in Massachusetts that I suppose was not about justice long before any of us realized it was teetering on the brink of collapse. Annie Dookhan was a warning that we all ignored to our peril. I should have seen it when they somehow got Lindsey that same lawyer that Annie Dookhan had. I should have seen it. It's not—I didn't realize until last week that lawyer George was a handler. Dookhan could create a huge—it could have created huge exposure for some people in the state police. It's incredible. If somebody painted the picture of the power structure that was at play here. Karen Read, when she said she was afraid of these people, I didn't—when she said it in the text or something and somebody leaked it. When I first started covering this case, I would not have got it. I don't know what it had been like. What do you mean? They're a state police unit. Like, yeah, they're paramilitary. Like, if you're a criminal, you should fear them, but they're not scary. Right now, after some of the stuff, and I'm talking about half the stuff I've seen as people pull, they horrifying. I think they're cornered, by the way. I don't think there's much they can do. They're getting a little desperate, burning a lot of their agents and their moles. And that's why I sense some kind of reckoning coming. You don't burn deep cover moles. I think Deanna was a mole for Kate for a while. You don't burn somebody like that unless it's almost over. Same thing with Kristy, the way Kristy's been burning everybody. I don't know who the hell she was working for, but whatever she's doing has got to be close to over because you don't burn everybody down unless it's almost over. So why is it almost over, folks? Why? What's coming? Some combination of all of this stuff. And if you want my fundamental prediction, let me give it to you like this. I don't like that it's coming to this, but it's a political question. It's a question of what the narrative is going to be. You don't just, as everyone now knows, you don't just prosecute people because they do things wrong. There's always a decision tree. So what do the feds want out of this? The people who were involved in the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder, whoever was the father of Sandra's unborn child, you know, it's not that Matt Farwell. Well, and then they obviously want this MSP unit. Okay, Michael Proctor, that cell phone, didn't just get cloned. It was a setup. They let Proctor lie to the judge about all those cases and all the cell phone records. And as soon as his lawyer filed the document, they moved on him. He must be under federal investigation. How did Aidan Kearney get those text messages from Jen McCabe to KF and Allie McCabe? Those were removed from Jen McCabe's extraction. The feds cloned her phone too, just like Aidan told Lindsey in those text messages as part of Exhibit O from November 28, 2023. Why did the feds clone Jen McCabe's phone? To see what Jen would withhold in the Rule 14 process. She didn't get banged up on charges federally, so she must have not done anything that bad. Something, however, is going to happen to Proctor, in turn, legally on the federal level. You can sense it. You can sense it. They're going to indict him. But for what? But then it leaves Tully, which was what this whole stream is about. We have the email from Tully. Forget about whether it's normal procedure for Tully to instruct Proctor to look into all the defense witnesses. We now know that Proctor was not running that case. It was Tully. It was all Brian Tully. What was the meme that I put up today? I really like this one. It says, the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm Brian Tully and I'm here to help." Attributed to Ronald Reagan. My point is though, it was Brian Tully. Look at it. Kate was his little, I don't know, what do we want to call, how can we say this nicely? You know, I'm trying to rise above and encourage more reasonable, respectful discourse. So Kate was his little, this is so hard. All right, let me, let me say a prayer here. Come on, now you can do this. Okay. So, there are so many words I want to use. Kate was his little assistant. I know, I know. You were expecting something wonderful. Every single thing that I was going to say there was going to be cruel, so I'm sorry. Kate was his little assistant, his little PI there. And then, I'm going to turn it around, nightmare PI Moms, version 2, Kate Peter, Jen McCabe, let's go down the seaport. Kate Peter was his little PI until he was quarterbacking all this. I think it was Morrissey who was even cut out of the loop a little bit, although I'm not sure he wasn't more involved than I'm willing to say right now. And you can see why it happened. Because when Morrissey recused in October of 2023 from the Aidan Kearney cases, and what became the Aidan Kearney and Karen Read investigations that are still ongoing, he didn't really recuse. He just had Tully and Kate running it. I started to wonder if Jen McCabe was like a PI for a case she was a witness on. I'm really starting to wonder that.

Grant Smith Ellis

17,939 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Made $530,000 with Ai Bot that started with $313. Didn't know how to code. Now this bots run 24/7 printing money while sleeping. I've made the exact step-by-step guide to build this Claude Code Polymarket trading bot. Prompts. Code. Risk settings. Paper trading checklist. Everything from zero to running bot. It's free. For 24 hours. After that I'm charging $499 for it. To grab it right now: 1. Comment "Claude Bot" 2. Like and Retweet this post 3. Follow me Himanshu Kumar ( I can't send DMs to non-followers ) I'm DMing everyone who Complete the 3 steps. I spent hundreds of thousands hiring developers because he was too scared to learn. Then learned Claude Code. Built algorithmic trading systems. $313 → $530,000. You have the same tools available right now. And you're using them to ask ChatGPT for Instagram captions. This attached video is a goldmine. Full live walkthrough. Claude Code building actual Polymarket trading bots. From zero. Every line of code. Every decision explained. Now let me break down why everything you're doing in trading is wrong and exactly how to fix it. Save this post. You'll hate yourself if you lose it. ↓ Let's start with why you keep losing money. You already know the answer. You just won't admit it. You overtrade. Every. Single. Day. You see a candle move. You feel something. You enter. No plan. No edge. No reason. Just feelings. Then it goes against you. You feel something else. Panic. Anger. Denial. You move your stop loss. Or you didn't set one at all. "It'll come back." It doesn't come back. So you take another trade. A revenge trade. Bigger size this time. Because you need to "make it back." That one fails too. Now you're emotional. Now you're tilted. Now you're using leverage you have no business touching. 40x. 50x. 100x. On a trade you entered because a candle looked "bullish" and some guy on Twitter said "send it." You get liquidated. Close the laptop. Punch something. Tell yourself you'll be "more disciplined" tomorrow. Tomorrow comes. Same cycle. Same result. Same liquidation. You've been doing this for months. Maybe years. And you still think the problem is your strategy. The problem isn't your strategy. The problem is you. Save this post right now. What I'm about to show you is the only way to remove yourself from the equation. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss any of this. ↓ Here's what's actually killing your account. It's not the market. The market doesn't care about you. It's not your indicators. RSI works fine. MACD works fine. They all "work." It's not your timeframe. It's not your broker. It's not the "manipulation." It's four things: 1. Emotions. You hold losers because hope feels better than loss. You cut winners because fear feels stronger than greed. You size up when angry. You skip trades when scared. Your emotional state determines your position size. That's insane. And you know it's insane. But you keep doing it. 2. Overtrading. You take 15 trades a day. Maybe 5 of them had actual setups. The other 10 were boredom. Boredom trades are the most expensive hobby in human history. 3. Leverage. You use 20x-50x on trades where you're not even sure about the direction. That's not trading. That's a casino with a nicer interface. 4. Fees. You're smashing market orders. Paying spread. Paying commission. On 15 trades a day. Your broker makes more money from your account than you do. Think about that. Your broker is profitable on your account. You're not. You're the product. Not the trader. These four things are why 90% of traders lose. Not bad luck. Not the market. You. Save this post and follow Himanshu Kumar because the solution is coming next. ↓ The solution is painfully obvious. Remove yourself from the equation. Not partially. Not "I'll be more disciplined." Not "I'll journal my trades." Not "I'll meditate before trading." Completely remove yourself. Build a bot. Let the bot trade. You go live your life. The bot doesn't feel emotions. The bot doesn't overtrade. The bot doesn't use reckless leverage. The bot doesn't smash market orders and bleed fees. The bot follows the rules. Every single time. Without exception. Without "just this once." Without "I have a feeling about this one." Rules in. Execution out. No human in the middle to mess everything up. That's algorithmic trading. And before your ego jumps in with "but I'm different, I have discipline" — No you don't. Your account balance proves you don't. If you had discipline, your account would be green. It's not. So you don't. Accept it. Automate it. Move on. This is the hardest truth in trading. Your discipline will always fail. A bot's won't. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the exact bot setup that removes your emotions permanently. ↓ "But I don't know how to code." Neither did he. The guy in this video didn't know how to code for most of his life. Got held back in 7th grade. People counted him out early. Spent years building apps and SaaS businesses without writing a single line of code. Hired developers on Upwork instead. Spent hundreds of thousands of dollars paying other people to build what he could have built himself. Because he was scared to learn. That fear cost him years. And hundreds of thousands of dollars. Sound familiar? You're doing the same thing right now. Not with developers. But with your time. You're spending thousands of hours trading manually because you're scared to learn the thing that would make trading automatic. The fear of learning to code is costing you more than any bad trade ever did. Because every month you trade manually is a month of emotional decisions, overleveraged entries, and unnecessary losses that a bot would never make. And here's the thing that should really frustrate you: AI does the hard parts now. You don't need a computer science degree. You don't need to work at a hedge fund. You don't need to be "good at math." Claude Code writes the code for you. You just need to think clearly about trading ideas. That's it. If you can describe a strategy in English, Claude can build it in Python. "I don't know how to code" stopped being a valid excuse in 2024. It's 2026. You're 2 years late on that excuse. Find a new one. Or stop making excuses entirely. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm showing you how people with zero coding experience are building profitable bots. ↓ The process that actually makes money. Three letters. R. B. I. Research. Backtest. Implement. That's it. That's the entire process. Every single day. Research: Find an idea. A pattern. A market inefficiency. Don't trade it yet. Don't even think about trading it yet. Just research it. Backtest: Test the idea against historical data. Does it work? Not "does it look good on one chart." Does it work across thousands of trades? Across different market conditions? Across in-sample AND out-of-sample data? If no, kill it. Find another idea. If yes, move to step 3. Implement: Build the bot. Deploy it. Paper trade first. Then live with small size. Scale only on evidence. Research. Backtest. Implement. Every day. No exceptions. You know what your current process is? Feel. Enter. Pray. F. E. P. Feel bullish. Enter a trade. Pray it works. That's not a process. That's gambling with a TradingView subscription. RBI is the only process that works. Save this post. Tattoo it on your forearm. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily RBI breakdowns. ↓ What Claude Code actually does that your manual process can't. You can maybe test 3-5 strategy ideas per week. Manually adjusting parameters. Manually checking results. Manually writing code (badly). Claude Code tests 50-100 ideas per week. With parallel agents running simultaneously. Multiple strategies being built, tested, and validated at the same time. While you sleep. The guy in this video spends 4-8 hours a day building systems with Claude Code. Not trading. Building. Research. Backtest. Implement. Then iterate. Improve. Optimize. Every day the systems get better. Every day the edge compounds. Every day the bots get smarter. While you? You spend 4-8 hours a day staring at charts making the same mistakes you made last month. Same indicators. Same patterns. Same entries. Same losses. He's iterating forward. You're running in circles. Same 8 hours per day. Completely different outcomes. Because he's building systems. And you're feeding a casino. Stop feeding the casino. Start building the machine. Save this post and follow Himanshu Kumar for the Claude Code workflow that iterates strategies while you sleep. ↓ Jim Simons. That's the benchmark. You probably don't know who Jim Simons is. And that tells me everything about how seriously you take trading. Jim Simons. Mathematician. Founded Renaissance Technologies. Built a net worth of $31 billion. 100% from algorithmic trading. Not one single manual trade. Not one "gut feeling" entry. Not one RSI divergence. Not one "smart money concept." Algorithms. Bots. Systems. Data. $31 billion. His fund averaged 66% annual returns for over 30 years. While you're excited about making $200 on a trade that you'll give back tomorrow. The best trader in human history never placed a manual trade in his life. And you think your edge is staring at a 5-minute chart with bloodshot eyes at 2 AM? Your edge is building the system. Not being inside it. Jim Simons is the benchmark. Everything else is noise. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm building toward the same goal and showing every step publicly. ↓ What you need to understand about patience. This is not get-rich-overnight. The guy in this video says it directly: "This channel is not for people looking to get rich overnight. It's not plug and play. There are no shortcuts. If you're impatient, this probably isn't for you." And that's exactly why most people will fail at this. Because you want results now. Today. This trade. You don't want to spend a week building a bot. You don't want to paper trade for 2 weeks. You don't want to test 50 ideas to find 1 that works. You want to copy someone's bot, run it live with your rent money, and be rich by Friday. That's why you'll be broke by Friday. The guy making $2.3M spent months iterating. Testing. Failing. Rebuilding. Testing again. He was patient when you would have quit. He was calm when you would have panicked. He was consistent when you would have given up. Patience isn't just a virtue in trading. It's the only virtue. Without it, everything else fails. Impatience is the most expensive personality trait in trading. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar and learn to build systems with the patience that actually pays. ↓ The live streams where the real learning happens. The YouTube video is the trailer. The live streams are the movie. Real-time bot building. Real-time questions answered. Real code shown. Real mistakes made and fixed. Not polished highlight reels where everything works perfectly. Actual development. Where things break. Where strategies fail. Where code doesn't compile. Where the fix takes 2 hours. Because that's what real development looks like. And seeing the messy parts is more valuable than any polished tutorial. Because when your bot breaks at 3 AM, you need to know how to fix it. Not just how to celebrate when it works. The streams mix beginner and advanced. Start with how to automate trading. How to use AI for code generation. Then dive into the daily work. Claude Code. Parallel agents. Constant iteration. Live debugging. 4-8 hours of real algorithmic trading development. Live. Uncut. No filter. Most "trading education" shows you the wins. This shows you the work. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the stream schedules and breakdowns. ↓ The belief that changes everything. Code is the greatest equalizer. Not money. Not connections. Not a degree. Not where you grew up. Not what school you went to. Code. Once you can build systems, you can build anything. For the rest of your life. A trading bot today. A SaaS product tomorrow. An automation business next month. A completely different life next year. The skill isn't "algorithmic trading." The skill is building systems. And that skill transfers to everything. The guy who can build a trading bot can also build a lead gen tool. Can also build a content pipeline. Can also build a SaaS product. Can also build literally anything that runs on logic and code. One skill. Infinite applications. And AI makes learning it 100x easier than it was 5 years ago. You don't need to be smart. You don't need talent. You need Claude Code and the willingness to sit down and build something instead of consuming content about building something. Building is the skill. Everything else is entertainment disguised as education. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm showing you how to build, not just how to watch. ↓ If any of this applies to you, pay attention. If you've lost money from overtrading. If you've been liquidated. If you know trading is the vehicle but manual execution keeps crashing you. If you've tried "being more disciplined" and it never lasted more than a week. If you keep saying "next month I'll start automating." If you've spent more money on courses than you've made from trading. There is a better way. It's not a magic indicator. It's not a signal group. It's not a $997 mentorship from a guy who makes money teaching, not trading. It's building your own system. A system that trades without emotion. A system that follows rules without exception. A system that runs while you sleep. A system that compounds while you live your life. That's the answer. It's always been the answer. You've just been too scared to accept that the solution requires building something instead of buying something. ↓ What the next 30 days look like if you actually commit. Week 1: Watch the video. Learn Claude Code basics. Build your first simple strategy. Run your first backtest. Week 2: Iterate. Let Claude improve the strategy. Run Monte Carlo validation. Paper trade. Week 3: Go live with $50-100. Tiny positions. Watch every trade. Compare to paper results. Week 4: Scale based on evidence. Not based on excitement. Not based on one good day. Based on data. 30 days from now you either have a running bot that trades without your emotions destroying every position. Or you're exactly where you are right now. Reading another post. Making another promise. Breaking it by Tuesday. Same 30 days either way. Different actions. Different results. Different life. ↓ Full video tutorial attached. Live bot building with Claude Code. From zero to running Polymarket trading bot. Every line of code. Every decision explained. The video is free. Claude Code is available now. The market is open 24/7. The only thing standing between you and a profitable trading bot is the same thing that's been standing there for months. You. Get out of your own way. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily AI trading bot breakdowns, live build sessions, and the full RBI process. Save this post. Watch the video. Build the bot. Or keep trading manually and keep losing. The choice has never been easier. And you've never been more stubborn about making the wrong one.

Himanshu Kumar

37,300 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa who has been in power since November 2017, following the military coup that removed President Robert Mugabe. He has now signed into law Constitutional Amendment No. 3, which, among many other things, extends his term of office to 2030, cancels the 2028 elections, extends the presidential term from five years to seven years, and removes the direct election of the President by citizens, transferring that responsibility to Parliament. This is a massive controversial constitutional change, one that would ordinarily require a referendum. However, the President and his advisers have refused to subject these changes to a referendum. That fact alone renders the entire process contestable and places a dark cloud of illegitimacy over his presidency beyond 2028, when his term of office was originally supposed to end. But this crisis will not wait until 2028. It began the moment he signed Constitutional Amendment No. 3 into law, as opponents of the Bill which is now law have already declared the process illegal because there was no referendum. The real challenge facing President Mnangagwa is not so much the opposition, which he has effectively dismantled with the assistance of opposition leaders who have allegedly been bought or co-opted. The real challenge is the economy. As Bill Clinton famously said, “It’s the economy, stupid.” The economy is what will create a wave of political discontent between now and whenever he eventually leaves office, assuming he does not die in office. I have seen some of my South African friends mocking Zimbabweans over this development and saying it is a Zimbabwean issue that Zimbabweans must resolve themselves. One can only say that if one is ignorant of the interconnectedness of our region and the ripple effects that this constitutional change is likely to create. South Africa’s illegal immigration crisis has been authored, in part, by the misgovernance in Zimbabwe, which successive South African governments and the African National Congress have tolerated and, at times, enabled. When the economy deteriorates in Zimbabwe, desperate people cross into South Africa by any means necessary in search of jobs and opportunities. This should not be viewed as a Zimbabwean crisis alone. It is a regional crisis, one that has the potential to create political and social turbulence throughout Southern Africa. History has taught us that whenever there is a crisis in Zimbabwe, South Africa bears much of the burden. But this post is not about South Africa. It is about Zimbabwe and Zimbabweans. The culture of bootlicking leaders and hero-worshipping politicians cuts across Zimbabwean society, both in the ruling party and in the opposition. Part of the reason why the opposition has been emasculated by Emmerson Mnangagwa is because citizens continue to place blind faith in leaders who have delivered very little. Those leaders continue to sell hope to the people, even when many Zimbabweans know that some of them have been captured or compromised. We saw this decadence in the Parliament of Zimbabwe. Opposition Members of Parliament voted with ZANUPF. Only 42 voted against the Constitutional Amendment Bill. The rest supported it. That is a reflection of the deep crisis within the opposition itself. Unfortunately, many Zimbabweans mistakenly think that Zimbabwe’s problems are exclusively a ZANUPF problem. They are not. They are a Zimbabwean problem that Zimbabweans themselves must resolve, and not sit and watch. As long as Zimbabweans continue to hero-worship personalities instead of supporting ideas, institutions and principles, the crisis will never go away. There are people with ideas and solutions for Zimbabwe, but they are not popular enough. Populism has derailed the opposition and made it ineffective in pushing back against ZANUPF’s misgovernance. The signing of Constitutional Amendment No. 3 into law is, in my view, the beginning of a new phase of resistance, assuming events themselves do not overtake any organic resistance to Mnangagwa’s rule. Zimbabwe today is a hopelessly divided society. People are fighting one another, and there is little national unity. President Mnangagwa could have secured his legacy by uniting the country and fixing the economy. Instead, it is evident that his administration remains adrift when it comes to economic management. This is, therefore, a moment for Zimbabweans to reflect on what they want for their country and how they intend to achieve it. For neighbouring countries, particularly South Africa, this is not Zimbabwe’s problem alone. According to the South African government, around 70% of women who give birth at Musina Hospital are Zimbabwean. You cannot simply turn them away. They will continue coming because the Zimbabwean government has failed to build a healthcare system capable of serving its people. An estimated 2,500 Zimbabwean women die every year while giving birth because of inadequate maternal healthcare facilities. The largest hospital in Zimbabwe still relies on a single maternity theatre built in 1977 by the Ian Smith government. That alone is a devastating indictment of the state of public healthcare in Zimbabwe, and a metaphor for the state of affairs. With unemployment estimated at over 95% in the formal and informal sectors combined, it is not surprising that Zimbabweans are prepared to risk their lives crossing crocodile-infested rivers in the Limpopo to reach South Africa. They will continue doing so. No amount of anti-immigration marches in South Africa will stop this reality. One either understands how crises create migration flows, or one lives under the illusion and delusion that Zimbabweans can somehow be prevented from seeking survival elsewhere. As we speak, many large-scale farms in Limpopo employ significant numbers of undocumented Zimbabwean workers. If those workers were suddenly to disappear overnight, the consequences for agricultural production and food prices would be enormous. This is not simply my opinion as an analyst or journalist. I have spoken to numerous farmers in Limpopo. I am a farmer myself and have access to many people within the agricultural sector, including some who are political actors in South Africa. The reality is that complex regional problems cannot be solved by slogans, social media noise or emotional outbursts. They require honest conversations, competent governance and courageous leadership on both sides of the Limpopo. As this law comes into effect, many people must reflect on the roles they played, directly or indirectly, in bringing Zimbabwe to this point. Vice President General Constantino Chiwenga was one of the leading proponents of the idea that President Mnangagwa could and should rule for as long as he wished, as he stated in the video I have attached below. Today, he finds himself effectively locked out of any constitutional path to the presidency. The opposition leader, Nelson Chamisa, also bears a significant share of responsibility. He effectively dismembered the opposition by getting rid of key allies who brought talents and skills that he himself did not possess. He dismantled leadership structures and ran the opposition without a constitution, creating an environment that enabled ZANUPF to infiltrate the opposition through the political charlatan Sengezo Tshabangu, whose actions were aided by Professor Jonathan Moyo’s ideas. Ultimately, the supporters of these two men must not live in denial by blaming everyone else while refusing to examine their own role in what has happened. There is nothing contained in this constitutional amendment, which is now law, that was not predicted. Analysts who warned that these developments would occur were ridiculed. They were demonised on social media, insulted and called names by opposition supporters. That abuse continues to this very day. It cuts across the political divide, both in ZANUPF and in the opposition, where leaders deploy and sponsor people to attack anyone who raises uncomfortable truths about the realities of life in Zimbabwe. One cannot help but wonder whether some of those who have spent years attacking people who brought genuine issues to the table have themselves been manipulated or even indirectly serving the interests of ZANUPF, because it beggars belief that people can be so self-contradictory and self-destructive in the manner in which Zimbabwean politics has unravelled since 2022. In 2021, through Constitutional Amendment No. 2, the running mate clause was removed. That amendment effectively dismantled the constitutional mechanism that many believed would guarantee General Chiwenga’s succession within ZANUPF. The running mate provision had been an important part of the constitutional architecture established by the 2013 Constitution, which was negotiated during the Government of National Unity and endorsed by almost 95% of Zimbabweans in a referendum. The Vice President remained silent. He was warned. I was among those who argued that the removal of the running mate clause was the beginning of what I called a “royal presidency”, one in which President Mnangagwa would accumulate so much power that he could potentially remain in office until his death. All the mistakes that have been made, whether through deliberate action, political expediency or sheer ignorance, have brought Zimbabwe to where it is today. Have opposition supporters finally understood that ideas matter more than bootlicking and hero-worshipping political leaders? I do not know. Their reaction to what is happening in Zimbabwe today will answer that question. Have members of ZANUPF who feel aggrieved by President Mnangagwa’s actions now come to understand that when people speak about constitutionalism, accountability and good governance, they are not necessarily being anti-ZANUPF? I do not know. Time will tell. My thoughts, as I end this article, are with the millions of Zimbabweans who remain trapped inside Zimbabwe with little or no prospect of meaningful economic opportunities and who are unable to live normal lives in the way that citizens in functional countries do. My thoughts are also with those citizens who spent years bootlicking and hero-worshipping politicians, unknowingly aiding this process and helping to create the very circumstances in which they now find themselves: unemployed, economically excluded and without hope for a better future. And my thoughts are especially with those who cannot leave. As the Jamaican reggae artist Buju Banton poignantly said in his song Untold Stories: “Those who can run, run away, but what about those who can’t? They will have to stay.” That, perhaps, is the greatest tragedy of Zimbabwe: those with the means often leave, while the poorest and most vulnerable are left behind to endure the consequences of political failure, economic collapse and broken leadership. Their suffering should never be forgotten.

Hopewell Chin’ono

225,507 görüntüleme • 10 gün önce