Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

NEW DRONE: the most efficient drone ever made! Luke Maximo Bell, a content creator from South Africa, documents how his father-son team set the Guinness record for the longest flight by an electric multirotor! 4 hours, 21 minutes, 39 seconds on a single charge, it beat the previous official...

LeoKharon's profile picture

Léo

1,691 subscribers

11,991 Aufrufe • vor 19 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

🚨🇨🇳 PENTAGON IN PANIC: CHINA FLIES HEAVY DRONE WITH 1,900-KM RANGE AND VERTICAL TAKEOFF China’s 1.5-tonne Qizhi-5 heavy tiltrotor UAV completed an autonomous flight test at the Chuzhou test base on August 1, performing vertical takeoff, hover, transition into forward flight, manoeuvring and landing without requiring a runway. 🔸 The aircraft is designed to combine helicopter-style access with fixed-wing performance. Its stated specifications include a top speed of 450 km/h, a 300 kg payload and a maximum range of 1,900 km. 🔸 Power comes from the domestically developed CS35 modular turboshaft engine, rated at 350 kW. Its modular architecture is intended to simplify maintenance and allow the engine to support multiple aircraft types. 🔸 The most important part of the test was the autonomous transition between vertical and forward flight. During this phase, lift shifts from the rotors to the wings while the aircraft’s aerodynamics, controls and power demands change rapidly. 🔸 Completing the full sequence demonstrated that the airframe, propulsion system and flight-control software can operate together through the aircraft’s most technically demanding flight mode. 🔸 The developers say the programme has mastered six major areas: overall configuration, transmission, rotor design, flight control, structural engineering and aeroacoustic noise reduction. 🔸 Qizhi-5 is being promoted for cargo transport, surveillance, emergency response and other low-altitude operations. The same runway-independent design also offers clear value for military logistics, reconnaissance and operations from dispersed sites. The Qizhi-5 can lift vertically from a confined area and then travel at aircraft speeds across distances normally associated with fixed-wing drones. That combination gives China access to locations where conventional UAVs still need a runway. Which Qizhi-5 advantage matters most: vertical takeoff, 300 kg payload, 450 km/h speed or 1,900 km range?
0:26

🚨🇨🇳 PENTAGON IN PANIC: CHINA FLIES HEAVY DRONE WITH 1,900-KM RANGE AND VERTICAL TAKEOFF China’s 1.5-tonne Qizhi-5 heavy tiltrotor UAV completed an autonomous flight test at the Chuzhou test base on August 1, performing vertical takeoff, hover, transition into forward flight, manoeuvring and landing without requiring a runway. 🔸 The aircraft is designed to combine helicopter-style access with fixed-wing performance. Its stated specifications include a top speed of 450 km/h, a 300 kg payload and a maximum range of 1,900 km. 🔸 Power comes from the domestically developed CS35 modular turboshaft engine, rated at 350 kW. Its modular architecture is intended to simplify maintenance and allow the engine to support multiple aircraft types. 🔸 The most important part of the test was the autonomous transition between vertical and forward flight. During this phase, lift shifts from the rotors to the wings while the aircraft’s aerodynamics, controls and power demands change rapidly. 🔸 Completing the full sequence demonstrated that the airframe, propulsion system and flight-control software can operate together through the aircraft’s most technically demanding flight mode. 🔸 The developers say the programme has mastered six major areas: overall configuration, transmission, rotor design, flight control, structural engineering and aeroacoustic noise reduction. 🔸 Qizhi-5 is being promoted for cargo transport, surveillance, emergency response and other low-altitude operations. The same runway-independent design also offers clear value for military logistics, reconnaissance and operations from dispersed sites. The Qizhi-5 can lift vertically from a confined area and then travel at aircraft speeds across distances normally associated with fixed-wing drones. That combination gives China access to locations where conventional UAVs still need a runway. Which Qizhi-5 advantage matters most: vertical takeoff, 300 kg payload, 450 km/h speed or 1,900 km range?

NewRulesGeopolitics

16,852 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Elon Musk just weaponized gravity. The entire trucking industry has a physics leak bleeding billions. Musk just sealed it. Most people look at the Tesla Semi and see a cleaner diesel. A truck that swapped a gas tank for a battery. That is a complete misread of the physics. Musk: “Let’s say you’re going over a mountain range. In a diesel truck, you actually don’t capture the energy of height or potential energy.” For a century, freight has fought gravity twice on every mountain. A diesel truck burns thousands of dollars in fuel clawing its way to the peak. It arrives at the summit loaded with enormous gravitational potential energy. And what does it do with that energy? It throws it away as heat. Musk: “You have to actually spend a lot of money on expensive brakes going down the other side so you don’t run out of control.” Diesel burns twice. Fuel going up. Hardware coming down. A century of logistics, and the descent was never anything but a cost to be survived. The Tesla Semi doesn’t survive the descent. It harvests it. Musk: “An electric semi truck is able to recapture the gravitational potential energy and in fact puts the energy back in the pack.” Regenerative braking doesn’t just slow the truck. It converts 80,000 pounds of downhill momentum into raw electricity flowing back into the battery. The mountain stops being an obstacle. It becomes a power plant. Here is the thermodynamic reality the market is missing. Diesel is closed on the descent. There is no version of a combustion engine that turns downhill momentum back into liquid fuel. It is structurally impossible. Electric is open in both directions. The same system that spends energy to climb gets paid on the way down. Wall Street keeps pricing the Tesla Semi on a cost-per-mile comparison. Kilowatts versus gallons. They are solving the wrong equation. You cannot win a price war against a machine that bills the planet for its own fuel.
0:58

Elon Musk just weaponized gravity. The entire trucking industry has a physics leak bleeding billions. Musk just sealed it. Most people look at the Tesla Semi and see a cleaner diesel. A truck that swapped a gas tank for a battery. That is a complete misread of the physics. Musk: “Let’s say you’re going over a mountain range. In a diesel truck, you actually don’t capture the energy of height or potential energy.” For a century, freight has fought gravity twice on every mountain. A diesel truck burns thousands of dollars in fuel clawing its way to the peak. It arrives at the summit loaded with enormous gravitational potential energy. And what does it do with that energy? It throws it away as heat. Musk: “You have to actually spend a lot of money on expensive brakes going down the other side so you don’t run out of control.” Diesel burns twice. Fuel going up. Hardware coming down. A century of logistics, and the descent was never anything but a cost to be survived. The Tesla Semi doesn’t survive the descent. It harvests it. Musk: “An electric semi truck is able to recapture the gravitational potential energy and in fact puts the energy back in the pack.” Regenerative braking doesn’t just slow the truck. It converts 80,000 pounds of downhill momentum into raw electricity flowing back into the battery. The mountain stops being an obstacle. It becomes a power plant. Here is the thermodynamic reality the market is missing. Diesel is closed on the descent. There is no version of a combustion engine that turns downhill momentum back into liquid fuel. It is structurally impossible. Electric is open in both directions. The same system that spends energy to climb gets paid on the way down. Wall Street keeps pricing the Tesla Semi on a cost-per-mile comparison. Kilowatts versus gallons. They are solving the wrong equation. You cannot win a price war against a machine that bills the planet for its own fuel.

Dustin

747,673 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

NEWS: BYD today ‌unveiled its second-generation Blade Battery with "Flash Charging 2.0" • LFP • Peak charging speed: 1,500kW • 20% ​to 97% charge in under 12 minutes, even at -20°C (-4°F) • Charges 10% to 70% in 5 mins • 5% higher energy density • BYD has increased the guaranteed capacity retention rate by 2.5% and promised a lifetime warranty on the battery cells • Delivers a driving ​range of up to 1,006 km (621 miles) on the (optimistic) CLTC cycle, an improvement from the ~600 km (373 miles) range in the first-generation Blade Battery. The new battery would likely mean a 450 mile range if tested on the EPA cycle. • Ten BYD models will be the first to feature the battery • The Yangwang U7, equipped with a 150-kWh battery pack, "achieves a pure electric range of 1,006 km, while the fully electric Denza Z9GT have a range of up to 1,036 km" on CLTC cycle. BYD also aims to expand its "Flash Charging" network to ​20,000 stations by the end of 2026, including 2,000 on highways. The company had built more than 4,000 stations as of March 5. However, keep in mind that in the past BYD has been slow to roll out promised ultra fast charging infrastructure expansion.
0:46

NEWS: BYD today ‌unveiled its second-generation Blade Battery with "Flash Charging 2.0" • LFP • Peak charging speed: 1,500kW • 20% ​to 97% charge in under 12 minutes, even at -20°C (-4°F) • Charges 10% to 70% in 5 mins • 5% higher energy density • BYD has increased the guaranteed capacity retention rate by 2.5% and promised a lifetime warranty on the battery cells • Delivers a driving ​range of up to 1,006 km (621 miles) on the (optimistic) CLTC cycle, an improvement from the ~600 km (373 miles) range in the first-generation Blade Battery. The new battery would likely mean a 450 mile range if tested on the EPA cycle. • Ten BYD models will be the first to feature the battery • The Yangwang U7, equipped with a 150-kWh battery pack, "achieves a pure electric range of 1,006 km, while the fully electric Denza Z9GT have a range of up to 1,036 km" on CLTC cycle. BYD also aims to expand its "Flash Charging" network to ​20,000 stations by the end of 2026, including 2,000 on highways. The company had built more than 4,000 stations as of March 5. However, keep in mind that in the past BYD has been slow to roll out promised ultra fast charging infrastructure expansion.

Sawyer Merritt

501,112 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

BREAKING: For 10 years the world believed there was one way to reuse a rocket: land it upright on its engines, the way SpaceX does. Today China refused to copy it, and pulled off something SpaceX never managed on a first flight. It caught the rocket instead. The Long March 10B lifted off from Hainan, China this morning, and about 6 minutes later its first stage came back down toward a 25,000-ton ship at sea. It did not land. Hooks on the falling booster snagged a net of tensioned steel wires strung across the deck, the wires riding robotic rails that slid into place to meet it. No landing legs. No touchdown. A rocket plucked out of its own descent by a moving net, on the maiden flight of a brand-new vehicle. No one handed China this. SpaceX guards its rocket tech as “trade secrets”, not “patents”, precisely so it cannot be read and copied. China watched a decade of public flights and then built an entirely different machine to reach the same prize, catching instead of landing, which sheds the heavy legs and spares the fuel a soft touchdown burns to hover. And this was never about cheaper satellites, though it delivers those too, feeding the thousands of birds in China's Starlink rival. Its deeper purpose is the Moon. That booster shares its core with the rocket meant to land Chinese astronauts on the lunar surface by 2030. In the same season, America's own Moon rocket, Starship, has flown 12 times and still has not shown the single maneuver its lunar plan depends on. One flight does not dethrone SpaceX. It has landed hundreds. What ended today is not SpaceX's lead. It is Uncle Sam’s belief that it owns the only road to the Moon. The piece works out which way of coming home actually wins.
0:28

BREAKING: For 10 years the world believed there was one way to reuse a rocket: land it upright on its engines, the way SpaceX does. Today China refused to copy it, and pulled off something SpaceX never managed on a first flight. It caught the rocket instead. The Long March 10B lifted off from Hainan, China this morning, and about 6 minutes later its first stage came back down toward a 25,000-ton ship at sea. It did not land. Hooks on the falling booster snagged a net of tensioned steel wires strung across the deck, the wires riding robotic rails that slid into place to meet it. No landing legs. No touchdown. A rocket plucked out of its own descent by a moving net, on the maiden flight of a brand-new vehicle. No one handed China this. SpaceX guards its rocket tech as “trade secrets”, not “patents”, precisely so it cannot be read and copied. China watched a decade of public flights and then built an entirely different machine to reach the same prize, catching instead of landing, which sheds the heavy legs and spares the fuel a soft touchdown burns to hover. And this was never about cheaper satellites, though it delivers those too, feeding the thousands of birds in China's Starlink rival. Its deeper purpose is the Moon. That booster shares its core with the rocket meant to land Chinese astronauts on the lunar surface by 2030. In the same season, America's own Moon rocket, Starship, has flown 12 times and still has not shown the single maneuver its lunar plan depends on. One flight does not dethrone SpaceX. It has landed hundreds. What ended today is not SpaceX's lead. It is Uncle Sam’s belief that it owns the only road to the Moon. The piece works out which way of coming home actually wins.

Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡

2,632,873 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Here's how Elon Musk found out Bill Gates has no basic physics. Gates showed up at Tesla Austin certain a long-range Semi could never work. Energy density? Efficiency? He didn't have a single number. Elon Musk: "You’d think that someone like Bill Gates, who clearly started a technology company that’s one of the biggest companies in the world—Microsoft—you’d think he’d be really quite strong in the sciences. But actually, at least from my direct conversations with him, he is not strong in the sciences. This was really surprising. He came to visit me at the Tesla Gigafactory in Austin and was telling me that it’s impossible to have a long-range semi-truck. And I was like, “Well, but we literally have them. And you can drive them. And Pepsi is literally using them right now. And you can drive them yourself or send someone. Obviously, Bill Gates is not going to drive it himself, but you can send a trusted person to drive the truck and verify that it can do the things that we say it’s doing.” And he’s like, “No, no, it doesn’t work. It doesn’t work.” And I’m like, “Okay.” I’m kind of stuck there. Then I was like, “Well, so it must be that you disagree with the watt-hours per kilogram of the battery pack. You must think that perhaps we can’t achieve the energy density of the battery pack, or that the watt-hours per mile of the truck is too high, and that when you combine those two numbers, the range is low. “And so, which one of those numbers do you think we have wrong, and what numbers do you think are correct?” And he didn’t know any of the numbers. And I’m like, “Well then, doesn’t it seem that it’s perhaps premature to conclude that a long-range semi cannot work if you do not know the energy density of the battery pack or the energy efficiency of the truck chassis?”
1:57

Here's how Elon Musk found out Bill Gates has no basic physics. Gates showed up at Tesla Austin certain a long-range Semi could never work. Energy density? Efficiency? He didn't have a single number. Elon Musk: "You’d think that someone like Bill Gates, who clearly started a technology company that’s one of the biggest companies in the world—Microsoft—you’d think he’d be really quite strong in the sciences. But actually, at least from my direct conversations with him, he is not strong in the sciences. This was really surprising. He came to visit me at the Tesla Gigafactory in Austin and was telling me that it’s impossible to have a long-range semi-truck. And I was like, “Well, but we literally have them. And you can drive them. And Pepsi is literally using them right now. And you can drive them yourself or send someone. Obviously, Bill Gates is not going to drive it himself, but you can send a trusted person to drive the truck and verify that it can do the things that we say it’s doing.” And he’s like, “No, no, it doesn’t work. It doesn’t work.” And I’m like, “Okay.” I’m kind of stuck there. Then I was like, “Well, so it must be that you disagree with the watt-hours per kilogram of the battery pack. You must think that perhaps we can’t achieve the energy density of the battery pack, or that the watt-hours per mile of the truck is too high, and that when you combine those two numbers, the range is low. “And so, which one of those numbers do you think we have wrong, and what numbers do you think are correct?” And he didn’t know any of the numbers. And I’m like, “Well then, doesn’t it seem that it’s perhaps premature to conclude that a long-range semi cannot work if you do not know the energy density of the battery pack or the energy efficiency of the truck chassis?”

Doge Tipping

151,995 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

This guy replaced an $8,000 survey crew with one drone and a pipeline on Claude Code that digitizes a whole site in a single trip. Inside it is not one drone but a whole pipeline of 5 modules on Claude Code each with its own job all answering to a single orchestrator. And he built them himself with no team. He draws one line on the map from the controller and the whole site starts turning into data at once. Pilot flies the DJI Matrice 350 RTK along the route and reaches where a crew drags tripods: the parking lot and the roofs and the grading. Scanner on the Zenmuse L2 records the geometry with a laser down to the centimeter. Builder in DJI Terra stitches the point cloud into a digital twin. Analyst on Claude builds what the client needs out of the finished model: a volume report and a progress diff and a tour behind a link. Mobile lives in his iPhone and hands the developer a link to the model while he drives to the next site. The site is ready as a file in about an hour and the developer rotates it in the browser himself and measures distances. No crew. No tripods. No week on site. Just him and a pickup and a drone and one API key. The whole processing pipeline lives in a folder at /Users/dev/site-capture. But he did not stop at a one time scan. The pipeline raises him by voice only when a flight misses a patch or when a sag on site goes past tolerance. And this is not made up: the DJI Matrice 350 RTK and the Zenmuse L2 are off the shelf enterprise hardware. The specs are one search away and the L2 really does write around 240,000 points per second. A crew for the same job charges $8,000 and three trips plus a week of desk work. His cost is tokens and subscriptions: one battery charge per flight and around $300 a month to host the finished models. In the end he draws one line on the map and an operator that does not exist scans the site and calculates the volumes and builds the report while he never leaves his truck. There is a huge market of everyone who needs to measure construction sites and warehouses and roofs and parking lots over and over while they still send out a photographer with a camera and wait a week. And he built this whole pipeline himself: one drone and one scanner and Claude Code that turns a flight into a file the developer pays for.
0:41

This guy replaced an $8,000 survey crew with one drone and a pipeline on Claude Code that digitizes a whole site in a single trip. Inside it is not one drone but a whole pipeline of 5 modules on Claude Code each with its own job all answering to a single orchestrator. And he built them himself with no team. He draws one line on the map from the controller and the whole site starts turning into data at once. Pilot flies the DJI Matrice 350 RTK along the route and reaches where a crew drags tripods: the parking lot and the roofs and the grading. Scanner on the Zenmuse L2 records the geometry with a laser down to the centimeter. Builder in DJI Terra stitches the point cloud into a digital twin. Analyst on Claude builds what the client needs out of the finished model: a volume report and a progress diff and a tour behind a link. Mobile lives in his iPhone and hands the developer a link to the model while he drives to the next site. The site is ready as a file in about an hour and the developer rotates it in the browser himself and measures distances. No crew. No tripods. No week on site. Just him and a pickup and a drone and one API key. The whole processing pipeline lives in a folder at /Users/dev/site-capture. But he did not stop at a one time scan. The pipeline raises him by voice only when a flight misses a patch or when a sag on site goes past tolerance. And this is not made up: the DJI Matrice 350 RTK and the Zenmuse L2 are off the shelf enterprise hardware. The specs are one search away and the L2 really does write around 240,000 points per second. A crew for the same job charges $8,000 and three trips plus a week of desk work. His cost is tokens and subscriptions: one battery charge per flight and around $300 a month to host the finished models. In the end he draws one line on the map and an operator that does not exist scans the site and calculates the volumes and builds the report while he never leaves his truck. There is a huge market of everyone who needs to measure construction sites and warehouses and roofs and parking lots over and over while they still send out a photographer with a camera and wait a week. And he built this whole pipeline himself: one drone and one scanner and Claude Code that turns a flight into a file the developer pays for.

Blaze

10,744 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

WOW, I Can’t Believe These Details About The Lahaina, Maui, Hawaii Fires & BlackRock Are Being Reported By The Media, This Women Needs To Be Protected “It's stunning to monitor the media's lack of interest in the whole Maui story. I've been in this business for 30 years. I'm stunned, but I'm not surprised. The incident seems to be the story here, right? But the true story, the media knows it is not allowed to tell. Is it a coincidence that the Maui police chief is the same man who was in charge in Las Vegas during that massacre that killed 58 people? Is it a coincidence that the Maui property, owned by million and billionaires, wasn't touched by the flames while homes of the locals all burned? What she fails to also mention is how the media hasn't even once interviewed a grieving parent. Not a single parent looking for their children. Not a single interview with a child. Not a single interview with the schools. Was it a coincidence that the largest system of outdoor emergency sirens in the world never made a sound as the fire devoured Lahaina. Was it a coincidence that at the same time, very same time, all the water was turned off? Was it a coincidence that police were ordered to block off streets and to funnel all the cars trying to escape? Think about this coincidence. That governor also signed an emergency proclamation on July 17th, three weeks before the fire, about housing of all things. Is it a coincidence that the government put up a black fence around Lahaina? Or that the FAA grounded all drones from flying over the affected areas? Is it a coincidence that since at least 2011 there have been plans to make Maui the first smart city run by 100% renewable energy? And that it must be a coincidence then that the locals whose homes did not burn are now being evicted from their property? And of course, a total coincidence that all the fact checkers who are checking these facts who say everything I just told you is just a coincidence are also owned and run by BlackRock.” DEWs, Direct Energy Weapons #Hawaii #Maui #MauiFires #Lahaina #LahainaFires #DEWs #DirectedEnergyWeapons
1:48

WOW, I Can’t Believe These Details About The Lahaina, Maui, Hawaii Fires & BlackRock Are Being Reported By The Media, This Women Needs To Be Protected “It's stunning to monitor the media's lack of interest in the whole Maui story. I've been in this business for 30 years. I'm stunned, but I'm not surprised. The incident seems to be the story here, right? But the true story, the media knows it is not allowed to tell. Is it a coincidence that the Maui police chief is the same man who was in charge in Las Vegas during that massacre that killed 58 people? Is it a coincidence that the Maui property, owned by million and billionaires, wasn't touched by the flames while homes of the locals all burned? What she fails to also mention is how the media hasn't even once interviewed a grieving parent. Not a single parent looking for their children. Not a single interview with a child. Not a single interview with the schools. Was it a coincidence that the largest system of outdoor emergency sirens in the world never made a sound as the fire devoured Lahaina. Was it a coincidence that at the same time, very same time, all the water was turned off? Was it a coincidence that police were ordered to block off streets and to funnel all the cars trying to escape? Think about this coincidence. That governor also signed an emergency proclamation on July 17th, three weeks before the fire, about housing of all things. Is it a coincidence that the government put up a black fence around Lahaina? Or that the FAA grounded all drones from flying over the affected areas? Is it a coincidence that since at least 2011 there have been plans to make Maui the first smart city run by 100% renewable energy? And that it must be a coincidence then that the locals whose homes did not burn are now being evicted from their property? And of course, a total coincidence that all the fact checkers who are checking these facts who say everything I just told you is just a coincidence are also owned and run by BlackRock.” DEWs, Direct Energy Weapons #Hawaii #Maui #MauiFires #Lahaina #LahainaFires #DEWs #DirectedEnergyWeapons

Wall Street Apes

849,419 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🇺🇸🇮🇷 A source tracking US bombing missions against Iran reports that yesterday, aircraft stationed in the UK remained at the base, and instead, B-2s took off from American territory. The mission involved 2-3 B-2 bombers. They crossed the Atlantic Ocean, refuelled, but then reached Portugal and turned back. "When approaching Gibraltar, it turned out that they supposedly did not know the coordinates of the rest of the route to Iran, and announced that they would turn around and head back west". The audio allegedly shows an intercepted conversation with Portuguese air traffic controllers. In addition, there were some problems with the B-1 the day before yesterday. As already mentioned, for several days, two bombers were sent to bomb Iran from the UK twice a day. But on March 17, only one B-1 out of two took off for the second mission, and it did not reach its destination - it returned after 8 hours of flight. Blind Fury going smoothly.
1:50

🇺🇸🇮🇷 A source tracking US bombing missions against Iran reports that yesterday, aircraft stationed in the UK remained at the base, and instead, B-2s took off from American territory. The mission involved 2-3 B-2 bombers. They crossed the Atlantic Ocean, refuelled, but then reached Portugal and turned back. "When approaching Gibraltar, it turned out that they supposedly did not know the coordinates of the rest of the route to Iran, and announced that they would turn around and head back west". The audio allegedly shows an intercepted conversation with Portuguese air traffic controllers. In addition, there were some problems with the B-1 the day before yesterday. As already mentioned, for several days, two bombers were sent to bomb Iran from the UK twice a day. But on March 17, only one B-1 out of two took off for the second mission, and it did not reach its destination - it returned after 8 hours of flight. Blind Fury going smoothly.

DD Geopolitics

290,285 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

i watched gemma 4 12b build something genuinely impressive today, and then loop itself to death right in front of me. the full run is in the video, sped up but completely uncut, watch it to the end and you will catch the exact moment it stops building and starts looping right in the middle of the work. the task was clean, build a single file gravity simulator, n-body physics, orbits, collisions, running locally on one 3090 through an agent. and for ten minutes it was a joy to watch. it reached for a symplectic integrator on its own, the correct one, the kind that keeps orbits stable instead of spiralling out. real gravity with softening, proper orbital velocities, momentum conserved on collision. the physics was right. the thing actually worked. then on the very last step, writing a few tests to prove its own code, it fell into a loop. not a crash, a loop. it started repeating itself and would not stop. ten more minutes, thirty four thousand tokens into a single answer, the same fragments over and over, until i killed it myself. so it's not that gemma can't code. it did the hard part beautifully. it cannot finish. it cannot hold a long task together without unravelling, and finishing is the entire job in agentic work. here's the part that stings. i run this exact task, same harness, same card, on the chinese open models, qwen especially, and i never see this. they build it, they test it, they stop. every single time. google has the raw capability, you can see it sitting right there in the code, and then the model loops itself to death on a task a 27b from alibaba finishes clean. open weights, apache 2.0, so much to love on paper. i just need it to know when to stop talking.
4:15

i watched gemma 4 12b build something genuinely impressive today, and then loop itself to death right in front of me. the full run is in the video, sped up but completely uncut, watch it to the end and you will catch the exact moment it stops building and starts looping right in the middle of the work. the task was clean, build a single file gravity simulator, n-body physics, orbits, collisions, running locally on one 3090 through an agent. and for ten minutes it was a joy to watch. it reached for a symplectic integrator on its own, the correct one, the kind that keeps orbits stable instead of spiralling out. real gravity with softening, proper orbital velocities, momentum conserved on collision. the physics was right. the thing actually worked. then on the very last step, writing a few tests to prove its own code, it fell into a loop. not a crash, a loop. it started repeating itself and would not stop. ten more minutes, thirty four thousand tokens into a single answer, the same fragments over and over, until i killed it myself. so it's not that gemma can't code. it did the hard part beautifully. it cannot finish. it cannot hold a long task together without unravelling, and finishing is the entire job in agentic work. here's the part that stings. i run this exact task, same harness, same card, on the chinese open models, qwen especially, and i never see this. they build it, they test it, they stop. every single time. google has the raw capability, you can see it sitting right there in the code, and then the model loops itself to death on a task a 27b from alibaba finishes clean. open weights, apache 2.0, so much to love on paper. i just need it to know when to stop talking.

Sudo su

39,719 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Thought experiment for people regarding the concept of Absolute Time. Absolute means NO EXCEPTIONS. We are NOT looking back in time when we see galaxies and stars. We are NOT looking back in time 1.25 seconds when we see the moon. We're Not looking back in time 3 minutes when we see Mars. We're Not looking back in time 8.33 minutes when we see the Sun. If an astronaut lit a matchstick on Mars, the distant observer would see predator heat waves at the top of the matchstick in real-time while the matchstick started to blacken towards the astronaut's fingers. But there would be no orange light from that chemical reaction or flame seen. If the matchstick burnt out before the packet of orange light from that particular chemical reaction made it to Earth… then the distant observer would just see a disembodied orange flash of light with a lag. But the Earth-bound observer would never actually see the flame associated with the orange wavelength it put out. The wavelength of color emitted by the flame is not a recording of reality. If the orange light is 650 Thz, that means there are 650 trillion individual and separate bursts of orange light pulsating in 1 second. NOT that "the same light" is "waving" 650 trillion times a second and that light is a recording of reality. There are 650 trillion brand-new lights flashing in 1 second. Each Hertz is a brand-new emission and packet unto itself. Time does not re-emit 650 trillion times a second, nor is a photon a particle or a packet of reality acting like the frame of a reel of footage. The orange light that already left the flame will continue to propagate out until it meets the electrons making up the distant observer. But remember, it is never the same light within that packet. And the electrons making up the observer will absorb all of those different lights within that packet and re-emit brand-new lights that produce the product of illumination. A photon is a massless packet of energy, spherically expanding at the rate of c from the source it comes from. Illumination is the result of that energy being absorbed and RE-emitted by any other electrons that did not output that primary packet. But time is not associated with the same light. It's never the same light and time does not re-emit between packets. Time is not relative. Do NOT allow your mind Carte Blanche to think along the lines of relative time. DROP IT for this thought experiment. We are thinking along the lines of ABSOLUTE TIME/ Galilean VARIANCE. What does absolute time mean? It means time is constant in ALL frames of reference. Any frequency shifts between atomic clocks IS a literal change in the speed of light. But relativity forbids the speed of light from Ever changing, so relativity (Lorentz INVARIANCE) invented the concept of the 4th dimension and space-time. Because Relativity doesn't allow light speed to shift.. they interpret the same frequency shift between atomic clocks as being conclusive, irrefutable evidence that time and reality itself shifts. Rather than say it's just that ONE clock being affected by Earth's gravity and the oscillation of that ONE cesium clock is being altered compared to other clocks. People don't realize that in relativity... time dilation is SYMMETRICAL! Not even most relativists know their own theory. If Clock A and Clock B are synchronized and together... and then they accelerate apart... Einstein said Clock A would see Clock B as being slower itself. And Clock B would view Clock A as slower than ITself. NOT that only one observer would see back in time and the other would see forward or not at all. No... BOTH observers are supposed to see each other BACK in time relative to each other according to Einstein and the consequence of the math. It doesn't make ANY sense!! But relativists toss that part of time dilation under their 4th dimensional rug. The rug is woven from threads of gold that only the smart people can see apparently. So... here's a thought experiment/ Gedankenexperiment for absolute time. NO paradoxes... no nonsense or confusion. What do you see in a club? You see disco lights changing and a color wheel effect. You see everyone in REAL-TIME. Not just because they are so close to the lights. Light is not a recording of reality. Light is simply color. Illuminating reality in a certain color. Just because you can't see something yet or the color hasn't reached you doesn't mean it isn't happening in real-time. Zoom out and look at the people in the club through binoculars a mile away. You are still looking at them in real-time. The colors are shifting with a delay in the club. Now look at the club through a telescope from the surface of the moon. You're still looking at the people in real-time. But now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 1.25 seconds because it takes light 1.25 seconds to travel from the Earth to the moon. Now look at the club through an even bigger telescope from the surface of Mars. You're still looking at the people in real-time, but now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 3 minutes because it takes light 3 minutes to travel from Earth to Mars. fr you are a third hypothetical observer zoomed out and watching the person from Mars AND seeing the club on Earth... you're still seeing everything happening in real-time as well. But you see the colored wavepackets traveling with a delay to the observer on Mars. And the disco color wheel effect is just lagging before it affects the observer from Mars and the observer on the Moon. It doesn't matter how far you zoom out! There is only now to observe. But there WILL be a lag and delay for a given color/wavepacket to reach distant observers. But all points in space are already illuminated by other starlight. So if you're too far away... you'll just see the club in real-time but without any disco lights. Just see them in white light because that's the source already illuminating the scene. This is where it gets the most difficult because people think light itself is a recording of reality that replays a scene from where it came from. But another punch in the gut of relativity is that in order to see REFLECTED light... that would require a TWO-WAY transit. Which means the light would have to be sent out... record the scene of a distant event and then RETURN in order to REplay the event. Which means it would take 6 minutes to see the club from Mars by that logic and 2.5 seconds to see the club from the moon by that logic. The difference in tick rates between clocks has NOTHING to do with time dilation. Wait.. what?! How can that be? Because a clock itself doesn't represent all of time and reality. The difference between clocks is a "Transverse relative time shift." If the only light in the universe was from the lighter… the only way a distant observer would be able to see the astronaut on Mars is if the astronaut held down the button of the lighter for longer than 3 minutes. It takes 3 minutes for the packet of light to travel from Mars to Earth. The distant observer would never be able to see Mars, unless the light stretched from Mars all the way to Earth, and illuminated the path between Mars and Earth. And that would take 3 minutes for the boundary and first part of that wave packet to reach Earth. But if the distant observer wanted to observe Mars in real-time… then that packet of light would have to be on for longer than 3 minutes. So if the astronaut on Mars flicked the lighter at 12:00, the distant observer on Earth wouldn't see anything until 12:03. If the light was on for 3 minutes and 10 seconds, and the distant observer is 3 light minutes away... the distant observer would be able to see Mars in real-time for 10 seconds starting at 12:03. In the 20 second video clip of the rotating planet with shifting colors... just imagine you're a couple light minutes or light seconds away. You're still seeing the planet spin in real-time. But there is simply a delay of switching colors. You are Not looking back in time. It's just a color wheel effect from a great distance away. That's it!! There are many major flaws which tarnish people's critical thinking on this thought experiment. 1. Light does NOT ricochet or bounce. Electrons absorb, emit and re-emit ALL electromagnetic radiation. The electrons, making up the glass of a mirror will absorb the incoming light and re-emit a brand-new light as an equal and opposite reaction. NOT that "the same light" bounced off the mirror and continued on within the same frame of reference.  2. Light is NOT a recording of reality. 3. It is NOT the same light being observed from a source. It's never the same light. Each Hertz is a new light. Think of half of a sine wave as being its own emission. On an oscilloscope, a stimulus generates a peak which initiates an equal and opposite trough. Or vice versa. That repeating process is not "the same light." If you cut and paste that sine wave to another sine wave, the boundary between the waves will always be in phase. (thus refraction) 4. The speed of light is NOT the same in ALL frames of reference, no matter what. 5. Light is NOT made of particles and waves that flip back-and-forth. 6. Time is NOT connected to the speed of light. Time remains constant regardless if you accelerate towards or away from a clock. The clocks themselves will indeed be off! But that's an affect on the electrons making up the atomic clock affecting the oscillation of the isotope which is ASSUMED to ALWAYS be the same. So ANY difference in oscillation is treated as a literal distortion in space-time. 7. Space and time are not linked at all. That is a mathematical artifice under Lorentz invariance. Time is relative under Lorentz invariance. But time is absolute under Galilean VARIANCE. When people hear or see the word GALILEAN... their brains switch to auto pilot to "aether theory" and "classical physics." What people don't realize is that aether theory used Galilean INVARIANCE. Rather than space-time being used as an excuse to explain the difference in frequencies between atomic clocks... it was originally aether being used as an excuse to keep the speed of light the same. But None of those things are valid! We are thinking under the framework of Galilean VARIANCE! Completely new revolutionary model returning to Isaac Newton and Classical physics but without the corpuscular theory (particle) theory for light... without a particle-wave duality... without an aether... without a 4th dimension. Just good ol elementary math within 3D Euclidean space. Everything happening in real-time, right now. This reformulation of Galilean transformations was offered by Dr. Edward Dowdye in 1991 called The Extinction Shift Principle. Effectivity as opposed to Relativity. If light required a two-way transit, in order to travel out… Record an event, and travel back to replay the recording…  then it would take 6 minutes to see the astronaut on Mars instead of 3.  Remember… They say the SAME light is a recording, and must travel there and travel back in order to REplay. Relativity says time is relative: t' ≠ t time is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and t = tₒ / √1 - v²/c² but Galilean Variance says time is not relative: t' = t (Time IS the same from all frames of reference) and τ_tr = τₒ / √1 - v²/c² Relativity says c' = c (The velocity of light is the same from all frames of reference) but Galilean variance says c' ≠ c (The velocity of light is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and that c' = c ± v (The velocity of light in one frame of reference is dependent upon the velocity of the light source relative to an observer in another frame of reference. Whether that light source is approaching or receding away from that observer) Relativity says E = mc² (Energy and mass are universally equivalent and literally interchangeable under All conditions.) but Galilean variance says E = Δmc² = mₒc² (Energy changes in a system are the result from changes in mass. mₒ represents the original mass. Mass and energy do not literally interchange. There is an equivalence, not an interchange.) The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity Star light and illumination: Flicking a Lighter on Mars visual example:
0:21

Thought experiment for people regarding the concept of Absolute Time. Absolute means NO EXCEPTIONS. We are NOT looking back in time when we see galaxies and stars. We are NOT looking back in time 1.25 seconds when we see the moon. We're Not looking back in time 3 minutes when we see Mars. We're Not looking back in time 8.33 minutes when we see the Sun. If an astronaut lit a matchstick on Mars, the distant observer would see predator heat waves at the top of the matchstick in real-time while the matchstick started to blacken towards the astronaut's fingers. But there would be no orange light from that chemical reaction or flame seen. If the matchstick burnt out before the packet of orange light from that particular chemical reaction made it to Earth… then the distant observer would just see a disembodied orange flash of light with a lag. But the Earth-bound observer would never actually see the flame associated with the orange wavelength it put out. The wavelength of color emitted by the flame is not a recording of reality. If the orange light is 650 Thz, that means there are 650 trillion individual and separate bursts of orange light pulsating in 1 second. NOT that "the same light" is "waving" 650 trillion times a second and that light is a recording of reality. There are 650 trillion brand-new lights flashing in 1 second. Each Hertz is a brand-new emission and packet unto itself. Time does not re-emit 650 trillion times a second, nor is a photon a particle or a packet of reality acting like the frame of a reel of footage. The orange light that already left the flame will continue to propagate out until it meets the electrons making up the distant observer. But remember, it is never the same light within that packet. And the electrons making up the observer will absorb all of those different lights within that packet and re-emit brand-new lights that produce the product of illumination. A photon is a massless packet of energy, spherically expanding at the rate of c from the source it comes from. Illumination is the result of that energy being absorbed and RE-emitted by any other electrons that did not output that primary packet. But time is not associated with the same light. It's never the same light and time does not re-emit between packets. Time is not relative. Do NOT allow your mind Carte Blanche to think along the lines of relative time. DROP IT for this thought experiment. We are thinking along the lines of ABSOLUTE TIME/ Galilean VARIANCE. What does absolute time mean? It means time is constant in ALL frames of reference. Any frequency shifts between atomic clocks IS a literal change in the speed of light. But relativity forbids the speed of light from Ever changing, so relativity (Lorentz INVARIANCE) invented the concept of the 4th dimension and space-time. Because Relativity doesn't allow light speed to shift.. they interpret the same frequency shift between atomic clocks as being conclusive, irrefutable evidence that time and reality itself shifts. Rather than say it's just that ONE clock being affected by Earth's gravity and the oscillation of that ONE cesium clock is being altered compared to other clocks. People don't realize that in relativity... time dilation is SYMMETRICAL! Not even most relativists know their own theory. If Clock A and Clock B are synchronized and together... and then they accelerate apart... Einstein said Clock A would see Clock B as being slower itself. And Clock B would view Clock A as slower than ITself. NOT that only one observer would see back in time and the other would see forward or not at all. No... BOTH observers are supposed to see each other BACK in time relative to each other according to Einstein and the consequence of the math. It doesn't make ANY sense!! But relativists toss that part of time dilation under their 4th dimensional rug. The rug is woven from threads of gold that only the smart people can see apparently. So... here's a thought experiment/ Gedankenexperiment for absolute time. NO paradoxes... no nonsense or confusion. What do you see in a club? You see disco lights changing and a color wheel effect. You see everyone in REAL-TIME. Not just because they are so close to the lights. Light is not a recording of reality. Light is simply color. Illuminating reality in a certain color. Just because you can't see something yet or the color hasn't reached you doesn't mean it isn't happening in real-time. Zoom out and look at the people in the club through binoculars a mile away. You are still looking at them in real-time. The colors are shifting with a delay in the club. Now look at the club through a telescope from the surface of the moon. You're still looking at the people in real-time. But now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 1.25 seconds because it takes light 1.25 seconds to travel from the Earth to the moon. Now look at the club through an even bigger telescope from the surface of Mars. You're still looking at the people in real-time, but now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 3 minutes because it takes light 3 minutes to travel from Earth to Mars. fr you are a third hypothetical observer zoomed out and watching the person from Mars AND seeing the club on Earth... you're still seeing everything happening in real-time as well. But you see the colored wavepackets traveling with a delay to the observer on Mars. And the disco color wheel effect is just lagging before it affects the observer from Mars and the observer on the Moon. It doesn't matter how far you zoom out! There is only now to observe. But there WILL be a lag and delay for a given color/wavepacket to reach distant observers. But all points in space are already illuminated by other starlight. So if you're too far away... you'll just see the club in real-time but without any disco lights. Just see them in white light because that's the source already illuminating the scene. This is where it gets the most difficult because people think light itself is a recording of reality that replays a scene from where it came from. But another punch in the gut of relativity is that in order to see REFLECTED light... that would require a TWO-WAY transit. Which means the light would have to be sent out... record the scene of a distant event and then RETURN in order to REplay the event. Which means it would take 6 minutes to see the club from Mars by that logic and 2.5 seconds to see the club from the moon by that logic. The difference in tick rates between clocks has NOTHING to do with time dilation. Wait.. what?! How can that be? Because a clock itself doesn't represent all of time and reality. The difference between clocks is a "Transverse relative time shift." If the only light in the universe was from the lighter… the only way a distant observer would be able to see the astronaut on Mars is if the astronaut held down the button of the lighter for longer than 3 minutes. It takes 3 minutes for the packet of light to travel from Mars to Earth. The distant observer would never be able to see Mars, unless the light stretched from Mars all the way to Earth, and illuminated the path between Mars and Earth. And that would take 3 minutes for the boundary and first part of that wave packet to reach Earth. But if the distant observer wanted to observe Mars in real-time… then that packet of light would have to be on for longer than 3 minutes. So if the astronaut on Mars flicked the lighter at 12:00, the distant observer on Earth wouldn't see anything until 12:03. If the light was on for 3 minutes and 10 seconds, and the distant observer is 3 light minutes away... the distant observer would be able to see Mars in real-time for 10 seconds starting at 12:03. In the 20 second video clip of the rotating planet with shifting colors... just imagine you're a couple light minutes or light seconds away. You're still seeing the planet spin in real-time. But there is simply a delay of switching colors. You are Not looking back in time. It's just a color wheel effect from a great distance away. That's it!! There are many major flaws which tarnish people's critical thinking on this thought experiment. 1. Light does NOT ricochet or bounce. Electrons absorb, emit and re-emit ALL electromagnetic radiation. The electrons, making up the glass of a mirror will absorb the incoming light and re-emit a brand-new light as an equal and opposite reaction. NOT that "the same light" bounced off the mirror and continued on within the same frame of reference.  2. Light is NOT a recording of reality. 3. It is NOT the same light being observed from a source. It's never the same light. Each Hertz is a new light. Think of half of a sine wave as being its own emission. On an oscilloscope, a stimulus generates a peak which initiates an equal and opposite trough. Or vice versa. That repeating process is not "the same light." If you cut and paste that sine wave to another sine wave, the boundary between the waves will always be in phase. (thus refraction) 4. The speed of light is NOT the same in ALL frames of reference, no matter what. 5. Light is NOT made of particles and waves that flip back-and-forth. 6. Time is NOT connected to the speed of light. Time remains constant regardless if you accelerate towards or away from a clock. The clocks themselves will indeed be off! But that's an affect on the electrons making up the atomic clock affecting the oscillation of the isotope which is ASSUMED to ALWAYS be the same. So ANY difference in oscillation is treated as a literal distortion in space-time. 7. Space and time are not linked at all. That is a mathematical artifice under Lorentz invariance. Time is relative under Lorentz invariance. But time is absolute under Galilean VARIANCE. When people hear or see the word GALILEAN... their brains switch to auto pilot to "aether theory" and "classical physics." What people don't realize is that aether theory used Galilean INVARIANCE. Rather than space-time being used as an excuse to explain the difference in frequencies between atomic clocks... it was originally aether being used as an excuse to keep the speed of light the same. But None of those things are valid! We are thinking under the framework of Galilean VARIANCE! Completely new revolutionary model returning to Isaac Newton and Classical physics but without the corpuscular theory (particle) theory for light... without a particle-wave duality... without an aether... without a 4th dimension. Just good ol elementary math within 3D Euclidean space. Everything happening in real-time, right now. This reformulation of Galilean transformations was offered by Dr. Edward Dowdye in 1991 called The Extinction Shift Principle. Effectivity as opposed to Relativity. If light required a two-way transit, in order to travel out… Record an event, and travel back to replay the recording…  then it would take 6 minutes to see the astronaut on Mars instead of 3.  Remember… They say the SAME light is a recording, and must travel there and travel back in order to REplay. Relativity says time is relative: t' ≠ t time is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and t = tₒ / √1 - v²/c² but Galilean Variance says time is not relative: t' = t (Time IS the same from all frames of reference) and τ_tr = τₒ / √1 - v²/c² Relativity says c' = c (The velocity of light is the same from all frames of reference) but Galilean variance says c' ≠ c (The velocity of light is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and that c' = c ± v (The velocity of light in one frame of reference is dependent upon the velocity of the light source relative to an observer in another frame of reference. Whether that light source is approaching or receding away from that observer) Relativity says E = mc² (Energy and mass are universally equivalent and literally interchangeable under All conditions.) but Galilean variance says E = Δmc² = mₒc² (Energy changes in a system are the result from changes in mass. mₒ represents the original mass. Mass and energy do not literally interchange. There is an equivalence, not an interchange.) The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity Star light and illumination: Flicking a Lighter on Mars visual example:

TheRealVerbz (Jason Verbelli)

16,608 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

This battery is about to change the world in 3 months, or make this guy a fool | Fred Lambert, Hacker News Donut Lab lit the EV and energy storage industry on fire last week with its announcement of a 400 Wh/kg solid-state battery cell that can last for 100 years. At face value, if true, we are looking at the single most disruptive announcement in the history of the electric vehicle industry and energy storage as a whole. We aren’t just talking about a better motorcycle battery. If the claims of a 5-minute charge, 100,000-cycle life, and ~400 Wh/kg energy density are accurate and scalable, as Donut Lab claims, this is the holy grail of energy storage. Battery breakthrough announcements generally don’t catch fire like this, but Donut Lab’s did because it said that the cell was already in production and will be in a production vehicle, Verge’s electric motorcycle, this quarter. It gave credibility to the claim, pushing everyone to report on it. Now, we have interviewed Donut Lab’s CEO and investigated the technology. At this point, it looks like either this battery changes the world within the next 3 months, or it will make the CEO look like a fool. In this article, we discuss the impact of the battery, whether real or not, as well as clues about the secret sauce behind its chemistry. The Holy Grail of Energy Storage Consider the implications. A battery that lasts 100,000 cycles is effectively immortal in human terms. You could charge it every single day for 270 years, and it would still be working. It means the battery outlives the vehicle, not just once, but ten times over. It changes the economics of transportation entirely: you buy the battery once, and you swap it into your next five cars. The power density required for a 5-minute charge and the 400 Wh/kg of energy density opens the door to commercial electric aviation, a sector currently strangled by the weight and slow charging speeds of lithium-ion. It solves the grid storage problem by offering a medium that doesn’t degrade, meaning utility companies could amortize the cost over a century rather than a decade. If this is real, the internal combustion engine didn’t just die today; it was buried 100 feet deep, and every other battery is not far behind. But, and this is a massive “but”, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and Donut Lab has yet to release that proof. And that brings us to the man making them. The Man Betting His Reputation I spoke with Marko Lehtimäki, the CEO of Donut Lab and Chairman of Verge Motorcycles. My goal was simple: ask him about the chemistry behind his battery and, if that doesn’t work, look him in the eye and figure out if he’s selling vaporware or if he’s sitting on the breakthrough of the century. Marko isn’t a random guy shouting about a battery breakthrough that will change the world. He is a legit entrepreneur. A computer scientist who built a no-coding app builder years before “vibe coding” was even a thing and sold it to SAP. After the successful exit, he became an investor and serial entrepreneur with his biggest, or most well-known, company being Verge Motorcycles, which has real products on the road. By announcing that this “miracle battery” is already in production and will be shipping in customer vehicles within 10 weeks, he is betting his entire personal reputation on this technology. If he misses this timeline or if the specs are fake, Donut Labs and Verge Motorcycles might not survive the credibility loss. He has a lot to lose here. In my article about the battery announcement last week, I noted that Marko’s presentation was incredible. He basically described a perfect battery: record energy density, incredible charge rate, unprecedented longevity, no rare metals, a cost lower than traditional Li-ion cells, and in scalable production right now. Sounds too good to be true? The only thing he didn’t share was details about the chemistry, beyond saying it doesn’t use lithium or other rare metals. What’s the point of protecting the chemistry if the battery is already in production and it will be in a product shipped this quarter? If that’s true, the battery will be reverse-engineered before the snow completely melts. We discussed it with Marko during our interview. His logic is that once the bikes ship, competitors will tear them down and figure it out anyway. But that won’t happen for another 10 weeks or so, and the head start is critical for a technology this disruptive. In the meantime, Donut Lab’s goal with the announcement was to get the attention of OEMs and ship them battery packs for validation. Marko said: We are right now shipping demo packs to OEMs under NDAs and under tight disclosures so that they can test that all of that is true, which serves our business very well [better than disclosing the chemistry]. But these programs with OEMs are likely to take a long time before they become public. Shorter term, there’s Verge Motorcycles shipping bikes with the battery by the end of the quarter. Before that, Marko also said that we should soon see third-party testing of those cells: We rather right now ship it to authorized research and science center that tests everything without opening it and telling everybody what’s in there. In short, we should have a good idea whether the claims are true or not in just a few weeks no matter what. What does Marko, or Donut Lab, have to gain by lying about this? I also discussed this with Marko and the only thing I could come up with is if he happens to be raising capital right now, but he shut that down: There are a million investors chasing us right now, but we are literally not talking to anybody. We tell investors that we can discuss terms after we have done all our disclosures. Marko insisted that Donut Lab is not taking any investment until they have proven their cells work. In short, it’s hard to find an upside for Donut Lab in making this announcement if the claims are not true. It doesn’t mean that they are, but it makes you think. The Investigation: What Is the “Donut Battery”? So, what is the secret sauce? Marko wouldn’t say, but after digging into public records, supply chains, and research papers, I believe we have a pretty good idea. Let me preface this by saying that I’m not a chemist or physicist, but I’ve been a journalist covering electric vehicles for more than a decade, and I’m pretty good at connecting the dots, and in this case, I’ve had the help of a couple of great sources, too. I’m not saying that this is the Donut Lab battery, but since they are not sharing much, we have to speculate, and all evidence points to a Finnish nanotechnology startup called Nordic Nano and its Chief Scientist, Dr. Bela Bhuskute. Donut Lab invested in Nordic Nano in October 2025, just months before this announcement. At the time of writing this, the press release has fewer than 200 views. The announcement went under the radar, and while Marko said that Nordic Nano is more of a “solar company” during our interview, the announcement mentions both solar and energy storage. Dr. Bhuskute’s research at Tampere University focuses on amorphous Titanium Dioxide nanostructures, which could benefit many different technologies, including batteries. It fits the “miracle” specs perfectly: - 100,000 Cycles: Traditional solid-state batteries are crystalline (like a brick wall) and crack when ions rush in. Dr. Bhuskute’s amorphous Titanium Dioxide is disordered (like a sponge) and “breathes,” allowing it to expand and contract without breaking. - 5-Minute Charge: This chemistry stores energy via “pseudocapacitance,” which is basically like Velcro. Ions stick to the surface almost instantly rather than having to burrow deep inside the material. - The Manufacturing: Nordic Nano uses a “nanofluid” printing process for its solar product using the technology. This aligns with Donut Lab’s description of a “clay-like” material that enables an easier manufacturing process. Some call this “battery printing”, which could explain Donut Lab’s ability to bring this to production in record time. When I asked Marko for the volumetric energy density (Wh/L), he claimed he “couldn’t remember”. Volumetric energy density is one of the few specs that Donut Lab hasn’t released. This battery is lighter than lithium-ion, but it could be bigger due to the amorphous nature of the titanium dioxide. However, the CEO claimed it has a higher volumetric density than traditional Li-ion batteries, without providing a specific number. If that’s true, not only could electric vehicles and energy storage switch to this new chemistry, but even personal electronics, such as smartphones. In 2025, Nordic Nano has been making moves, including securing a former large retail location in Imatra, Finland, near the Russian border: It could be where the company has set up production. Following investment from the Finnish government, Nordic Nano had to elaborate a bit on its products and confirmed that it is working on “solar energy systems and energy storage solutions”: The company’s range of products includes two product families: solar energy systems and energy storage solutions: The ultra-thin and flexible solar film collects twice the amount of energy compared to traditional silicon-based solar panels. Solid-state salt batteries are manufactured by printing from nanofluid, which enables the efficient use of space and the production of batteries in varying shapes. Furthermore, the company confirmed that it is using a “screenprinting” manufacturing method. This is not new. Other companies have produced battery cells with this technology with varying degrees of success. It appears that the bet is that the amorphous rather than crystalized titanium dioxide nanostructure could be more easily adapted and scaled with this manufacturing technology. Electrek’s Take I’m naturally skeptical, and this screams “too good to be true”, but I can’t find anything that categorically rejects the claims. I get battery breakthrough announcements in my inbox every week, and most of the time they never amount to anything. If I decide to spend some time researching them and talking to experts, I generally quickly hit a problem or two that make them commercially unviable. This announcement is different. We can’t really investigate the actual breakthrough; we can only speculate about it, since it is guarded. Marko’s logic for guarding the chemistry is sound, and the incentives to lie about what they have aren’t clear if he is not currently raising money. Then, because they claim this is already in production and will be in a deliverable product within weeks, we will know whether the claims are true in short order, and their reputations, especially Marko’s, are on the line. During my interview, Marko didn’t seem too worried about it. It doesn’t sound like someone who needs to quickly figure out how to deliver this, but rather someone who has a couple of aces in their hand and is looking to maximize them. It’s also strange that this innovation and then production quickly comes from a relatively small company. I thought researching Donut Lab would make me more skeptical about the claims, but it’s the contrary. It confirms that their technology stems from years of research, backed by university and government funding for its commercialization. Could it be that this critical research went under the radar and a small electric motorcycle startup in need of a significant bump in energy density stumbled upon it? Then, a savvy entrepreneur quickly found a way to optimize the impact of this potentially groundbreaking tech by spinning out a startup from the motorcycle company to market the battery to a broader market. Maybe? This could be real, or it could be hype. Again, I’m still skeptical, but I can’t point to anything specific that would disprove any claim made about this miracle battery. Again, if this is true, we are talking about a complete reset of the entire energy and transportation sectors. Donut Lab would become one of the biggest companies in the world. A Nobel Prize would be coming to Dr. Bhuskute and her colleagues in the near future. If it’s not, Marko and Donut Lab’s reputation would be destroyed. There might also be a middle conclusion where the battery is nearly as good as they claim, but when you ramp up production, other problems arise, such as scrap, which has been the undoing of another company that recently tried screenprinting batteries. Who knows? But it sounds like we should find out soon. Within weeks, we should get independent verifications of the specs. Then the bikes get delivered within months. You can fake a presentation, but there are things you can’t fake.
24:10

This battery is about to change the world in 3 months, or make this guy a fool | Fred Lambert, Hacker News Donut Lab lit the EV and energy storage industry on fire last week with its announcement of a 400 Wh/kg solid-state battery cell that can last for 100 years. At face value, if true, we are looking at the single most disruptive announcement in the history of the electric vehicle industry and energy storage as a whole. We aren’t just talking about a better motorcycle battery. If the claims of a 5-minute charge, 100,000-cycle life, and ~400 Wh/kg energy density are accurate and scalable, as Donut Lab claims, this is the holy grail of energy storage. Battery breakthrough announcements generally don’t catch fire like this, but Donut Lab’s did because it said that the cell was already in production and will be in a production vehicle, Verge’s electric motorcycle, this quarter. It gave credibility to the claim, pushing everyone to report on it. Now, we have interviewed Donut Lab’s CEO and investigated the technology. At this point, it looks like either this battery changes the world within the next 3 months, or it will make the CEO look like a fool. In this article, we discuss the impact of the battery, whether real or not, as well as clues about the secret sauce behind its chemistry. The Holy Grail of Energy Storage Consider the implications. A battery that lasts 100,000 cycles is effectively immortal in human terms. You could charge it every single day for 270 years, and it would still be working. It means the battery outlives the vehicle, not just once, but ten times over. It changes the economics of transportation entirely: you buy the battery once, and you swap it into your next five cars. The power density required for a 5-minute charge and the 400 Wh/kg of energy density opens the door to commercial electric aviation, a sector currently strangled by the weight and slow charging speeds of lithium-ion. It solves the grid storage problem by offering a medium that doesn’t degrade, meaning utility companies could amortize the cost over a century rather than a decade. If this is real, the internal combustion engine didn’t just die today; it was buried 100 feet deep, and every other battery is not far behind. But, and this is a massive “but”, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and Donut Lab has yet to release that proof. And that brings us to the man making them. The Man Betting His Reputation I spoke with Marko Lehtimäki, the CEO of Donut Lab and Chairman of Verge Motorcycles. My goal was simple: ask him about the chemistry behind his battery and, if that doesn’t work, look him in the eye and figure out if he’s selling vaporware or if he’s sitting on the breakthrough of the century. Marko isn’t a random guy shouting about a battery breakthrough that will change the world. He is a legit entrepreneur. A computer scientist who built a no-coding app builder years before “vibe coding” was even a thing and sold it to SAP. After the successful exit, he became an investor and serial entrepreneur with his biggest, or most well-known, company being Verge Motorcycles, which has real products on the road. By announcing that this “miracle battery” is already in production and will be shipping in customer vehicles within 10 weeks, he is betting his entire personal reputation on this technology. If he misses this timeline or if the specs are fake, Donut Labs and Verge Motorcycles might not survive the credibility loss. He has a lot to lose here. In my article about the battery announcement last week, I noted that Marko’s presentation was incredible. He basically described a perfect battery: record energy density, incredible charge rate, unprecedented longevity, no rare metals, a cost lower than traditional Li-ion cells, and in scalable production right now. Sounds too good to be true? The only thing he didn’t share was details about the chemistry, beyond saying it doesn’t use lithium or other rare metals. What’s the point of protecting the chemistry if the battery is already in production and it will be in a product shipped this quarter? If that’s true, the battery will be reverse-engineered before the snow completely melts. We discussed it with Marko during our interview. His logic is that once the bikes ship, competitors will tear them down and figure it out anyway. But that won’t happen for another 10 weeks or so, and the head start is critical for a technology this disruptive. In the meantime, Donut Lab’s goal with the announcement was to get the attention of OEMs and ship them battery packs for validation. Marko said: We are right now shipping demo packs to OEMs under NDAs and under tight disclosures so that they can test that all of that is true, which serves our business very well [better than disclosing the chemistry]. But these programs with OEMs are likely to take a long time before they become public. Shorter term, there’s Verge Motorcycles shipping bikes with the battery by the end of the quarter. Before that, Marko also said that we should soon see third-party testing of those cells: We rather right now ship it to authorized research and science center that tests everything without opening it and telling everybody what’s in there. In short, we should have a good idea whether the claims are true or not in just a few weeks no matter what. What does Marko, or Donut Lab, have to gain by lying about this? I also discussed this with Marko and the only thing I could come up with is if he happens to be raising capital right now, but he shut that down: There are a million investors chasing us right now, but we are literally not talking to anybody. We tell investors that we can discuss terms after we have done all our disclosures. Marko insisted that Donut Lab is not taking any investment until they have proven their cells work. In short, it’s hard to find an upside for Donut Lab in making this announcement if the claims are not true. It doesn’t mean that they are, but it makes you think. The Investigation: What Is the “Donut Battery”? So, what is the secret sauce? Marko wouldn’t say, but after digging into public records, supply chains, and research papers, I believe we have a pretty good idea. Let me preface this by saying that I’m not a chemist or physicist, but I’ve been a journalist covering electric vehicles for more than a decade, and I’m pretty good at connecting the dots, and in this case, I’ve had the help of a couple of great sources, too. I’m not saying that this is the Donut Lab battery, but since they are not sharing much, we have to speculate, and all evidence points to a Finnish nanotechnology startup called Nordic Nano and its Chief Scientist, Dr. Bela Bhuskute. Donut Lab invested in Nordic Nano in October 2025, just months before this announcement. At the time of writing this, the press release has fewer than 200 views. The announcement went under the radar, and while Marko said that Nordic Nano is more of a “solar company” during our interview, the announcement mentions both solar and energy storage. Dr. Bhuskute’s research at Tampere University focuses on amorphous Titanium Dioxide nanostructures, which could benefit many different technologies, including batteries. It fits the “miracle” specs perfectly: - 100,000 Cycles: Traditional solid-state batteries are crystalline (like a brick wall) and crack when ions rush in. Dr. Bhuskute’s amorphous Titanium Dioxide is disordered (like a sponge) and “breathes,” allowing it to expand and contract without breaking. - 5-Minute Charge: This chemistry stores energy via “pseudocapacitance,” which is basically like Velcro. Ions stick to the surface almost instantly rather than having to burrow deep inside the material. - The Manufacturing: Nordic Nano uses a “nanofluid” printing process for its solar product using the technology. This aligns with Donut Lab’s description of a “clay-like” material that enables an easier manufacturing process. Some call this “battery printing”, which could explain Donut Lab’s ability to bring this to production in record time. When I asked Marko for the volumetric energy density (Wh/L), he claimed he “couldn’t remember”. Volumetric energy density is one of the few specs that Donut Lab hasn’t released. This battery is lighter than lithium-ion, but it could be bigger due to the amorphous nature of the titanium dioxide. However, the CEO claimed it has a higher volumetric density than traditional Li-ion batteries, without providing a specific number. If that’s true, not only could electric vehicles and energy storage switch to this new chemistry, but even personal electronics, such as smartphones. In 2025, Nordic Nano has been making moves, including securing a former large retail location in Imatra, Finland, near the Russian border: It could be where the company has set up production. Following investment from the Finnish government, Nordic Nano had to elaborate a bit on its products and confirmed that it is working on “solar energy systems and energy storage solutions”: The company’s range of products includes two product families: solar energy systems and energy storage solutions: The ultra-thin and flexible solar film collects twice the amount of energy compared to traditional silicon-based solar panels. Solid-state salt batteries are manufactured by printing from nanofluid, which enables the efficient use of space and the production of batteries in varying shapes. Furthermore, the company confirmed that it is using a “screenprinting” manufacturing method. This is not new. Other companies have produced battery cells with this technology with varying degrees of success. It appears that the bet is that the amorphous rather than crystalized titanium dioxide nanostructure could be more easily adapted and scaled with this manufacturing technology. Electrek’s Take I’m naturally skeptical, and this screams “too good to be true”, but I can’t find anything that categorically rejects the claims. I get battery breakthrough announcements in my inbox every week, and most of the time they never amount to anything. If I decide to spend some time researching them and talking to experts, I generally quickly hit a problem or two that make them commercially unviable. This announcement is different. We can’t really investigate the actual breakthrough; we can only speculate about it, since it is guarded. Marko’s logic for guarding the chemistry is sound, and the incentives to lie about what they have aren’t clear if he is not currently raising money. Then, because they claim this is already in production and will be in a deliverable product within weeks, we will know whether the claims are true in short order, and their reputations, especially Marko’s, are on the line. During my interview, Marko didn’t seem too worried about it. It doesn’t sound like someone who needs to quickly figure out how to deliver this, but rather someone who has a couple of aces in their hand and is looking to maximize them. It’s also strange that this innovation and then production quickly comes from a relatively small company. I thought researching Donut Lab would make me more skeptical about the claims, but it’s the contrary. It confirms that their technology stems from years of research, backed by university and government funding for its commercialization. Could it be that this critical research went under the radar and a small electric motorcycle startup in need of a significant bump in energy density stumbled upon it? Then, a savvy entrepreneur quickly found a way to optimize the impact of this potentially groundbreaking tech by spinning out a startup from the motorcycle company to market the battery to a broader market. Maybe? This could be real, or it could be hype. Again, I’m still skeptical, but I can’t point to anything specific that would disprove any claim made about this miracle battery. Again, if this is true, we are talking about a complete reset of the entire energy and transportation sectors. Donut Lab would become one of the biggest companies in the world. A Nobel Prize would be coming to Dr. Bhuskute and her colleagues in the near future. If it’s not, Marko and Donut Lab’s reputation would be destroyed. There might also be a middle conclusion where the battery is nearly as good as they claim, but when you ramp up production, other problems arise, such as scrap, which has been the undoing of another company that recently tried screenprinting batteries. Who knows? But it sounds like we should find out soon. Within weeks, we should get independent verifications of the specs. Then the bikes get delivered within months. You can fake a presentation, but there are things you can’t fake.

Owen Gregorian

123,359 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

A rare glimpse at the territorial nature of wolf packs. Instances like this probably happen regularly as wolves aim to maintain/expand their territory and eliminate neighboring wolves (i.e., competitors for resources). These snippets show the breeding pair of the Windsong Pack venturing out of their territory to chase the breeding male of the neighboring pack (the Blood Moon Pack). If the Windsong Pack had caught up to this wolf, they would have undoubtedly killed him. But they didn’t. The chase did not last very long—a handful of minutes with a straight-line distance of just under a mile. The first clips of the chase were from a camera on the edge of a beaver dam. The breeding male of the neighboring pack (Wolf Y1T) crossed the dam and clearly knew he was being followed. A minute later, the Windsong Pack passed by in pursuit. The next clips were captured about 4 minutes later on a second camera just under a mile to the north of the first one. On this second camera, Wolf Y1T was running full speed. However, the Windsong Pack while in pursuit, appeared to be slowing down. A minute later, the Windsong pair walks back past this camera…the chase had ended. About an hour after that, the Windsong Pack crossed the beaver dam that the first camera was on in their return trip to their territory. Interestingly, about 2 months after this video was captured, Wolf Y1T’s mate was killed by the neighboring pack to the south (Biondich Pack). Since the pack was only two wolves (Y1T and his mate), this event left Y1T by himself and the status of the Blood Moon Pack up in the air. However, within a few weeks, Y1T found another mate and through some series of events, Y1T and his new mate booted the Windsong pair (i.e., the wolves in this video pursuing Y1T) from their territory this past summer, and took it over. As such, Y1T and his mate (the Blood Moon Pack) currently occupy the Windsong Pack territory.
0:36

A rare glimpse at the territorial nature of wolf packs. Instances like this probably happen regularly as wolves aim to maintain/expand their territory and eliminate neighboring wolves (i.e., competitors for resources). These snippets show the breeding pair of the Windsong Pack venturing out of their territory to chase the breeding male of the neighboring pack (the Blood Moon Pack). If the Windsong Pack had caught up to this wolf, they would have undoubtedly killed him. But they didn’t. The chase did not last very long—a handful of minutes with a straight-line distance of just under a mile. The first clips of the chase were from a camera on the edge of a beaver dam. The breeding male of the neighboring pack (Wolf Y1T) crossed the dam and clearly knew he was being followed. A minute later, the Windsong Pack passed by in pursuit. The next clips were captured about 4 minutes later on a second camera just under a mile to the north of the first one. On this second camera, Wolf Y1T was running full speed. However, the Windsong Pack while in pursuit, appeared to be slowing down. A minute later, the Windsong pair walks back past this camera…the chase had ended. About an hour after that, the Windsong Pack crossed the beaver dam that the first camera was on in their return trip to their territory. Interestingly, about 2 months after this video was captured, Wolf Y1T’s mate was killed by the neighboring pack to the south (Biondich Pack). Since the pack was only two wolves (Y1T and his mate), this event left Y1T by himself and the status of the Blood Moon Pack up in the air. However, within a few weeks, Y1T found another mate and through some series of events, Y1T and his new mate booted the Windsong pair (i.e., the wolves in this video pursuing Y1T) from their territory this past summer, and took it over. As such, Y1T and his mate (the Blood Moon Pack) currently occupy the Windsong Pack territory.

Voyageurs Wolf Project

16,487 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

For the last time, let me address some data boys who keep talking about a so called “House of Reps version” of the tax bill, as if its separate from that of Senate and the harmonised version, they are either ignorant of how this particular bill was passed or are deliberately misleading the public! Yes, under normal circumstances, a bill is debated independently on the floors of the House of Representatives and the Senate. That is the standard legislative procedure that the data boys keep explaining. But the tax bill did not follow that route, precisely because of how sensitive, heated, and contentious it was. In this case, the leadership of the National Assembly adopted an unusual but deliberate approach. 40 senators and 40 members of the House of Representatives were nominated, with each state represented by one senator and one rep member, minimum. These 80 lawmakers spent a full week at the Hilton Hotel, with logistics sponsored by FIRS, jointly harmonising the tax bill line by line. At the end of that exercise, there were no parallel House or Senate versions. Both chambers were presented with the same single, harmonised tax bill. That identical document was laid before the House of Representatives and the Senate, debated, and passed by both chambers. This was the version transmitted to the president and subsequently assented to. Traditionally, harmonisation comes after each chamber has passed its own version. That did not happen here. Lawmakers worked together from the outset to produce one unified bill, and that is what was approved. There is no “House version” separate from that of the Senate, in this case. It simply does not exist. The real issue is that this harmonised version, the one passed by both chambers and signed by the president, is not what appeared in the gazetted copy made public. That gazetted version contains alterations that were never approved by the National Assembly. On Thursday, 18 December 2025, after Hon. Abdulsamad Dasuki raised the alarm on the floor of the House. The speaker announced the setting up of a committee and gave it one week to report. On the surface, this sounded reasonable. In reality, it was a convenient way of pushing the issue under the carpet. The National Assembly proceeds on its end of year break tomorrow, Tuesday, with the committee’s report due next Thursday, which is after they've gone on break. By the time lawmakers reconvene in January, the tax law would already be in force, and the opportunity for meaningful legislative correction would have slipped away. What is most telling is the silence from the presidency and from Taiwo Oyedele and his team. They have chosen not to address this issue at all, not because it is insignificant, but because they do not want to go on record. If no forgery occurred, setting the record straight should be straightforward. They have done so before on issues far less serious than this. Sections 4 and 58 of the Constitution vest law-making power solely in the National Assembly. Any provision inserted, removed, or altered after passage is unconstitutional, void, unenforceable, and constitutes a clear breach of the separation of powers doctrine! This issue will not be swept under the carpet, and no one will succeed in shutting people up! Listen to Hon Falake on the harmonization issue!
0:35

For the last time, let me address some data boys who keep talking about a so called “House of Reps version” of the tax bill, as if its separate from that of Senate and the harmonised version, they are either ignorant of how this particular bill was passed or are deliberately misleading the public! Yes, under normal circumstances, a bill is debated independently on the floors of the House of Representatives and the Senate. That is the standard legislative procedure that the data boys keep explaining. But the tax bill did not follow that route, precisely because of how sensitive, heated, and contentious it was. In this case, the leadership of the National Assembly adopted an unusual but deliberate approach. 40 senators and 40 members of the House of Representatives were nominated, with each state represented by one senator and one rep member, minimum. These 80 lawmakers spent a full week at the Hilton Hotel, with logistics sponsored by FIRS, jointly harmonising the tax bill line by line. At the end of that exercise, there were no parallel House or Senate versions. Both chambers were presented with the same single, harmonised tax bill. That identical document was laid before the House of Representatives and the Senate, debated, and passed by both chambers. This was the version transmitted to the president and subsequently assented to. Traditionally, harmonisation comes after each chamber has passed its own version. That did not happen here. Lawmakers worked together from the outset to produce one unified bill, and that is what was approved. There is no “House version” separate from that of the Senate, in this case. It simply does not exist. The real issue is that this harmonised version, the one passed by both chambers and signed by the president, is not what appeared in the gazetted copy made public. That gazetted version contains alterations that were never approved by the National Assembly. On Thursday, 18 December 2025, after Hon. Abdulsamad Dasuki raised the alarm on the floor of the House. The speaker announced the setting up of a committee and gave it one week to report. On the surface, this sounded reasonable. In reality, it was a convenient way of pushing the issue under the carpet. The National Assembly proceeds on its end of year break tomorrow, Tuesday, with the committee’s report due next Thursday, which is after they've gone on break. By the time lawmakers reconvene in January, the tax law would already be in force, and the opportunity for meaningful legislative correction would have slipped away. What is most telling is the silence from the presidency and from Taiwo Oyedele and his team. They have chosen not to address this issue at all, not because it is insignificant, but because they do not want to go on record. If no forgery occurred, setting the record straight should be straightforward. They have done so before on issues far less serious than this. Sections 4 and 58 of the Constitution vest law-making power solely in the National Assembly. Any provision inserted, removed, or altered after passage is unconstitutional, void, unenforceable, and constitutes a clear breach of the separation of powers doctrine! This issue will not be swept under the carpet, and no one will succeed in shutting people up! Listen to Hon Falake on the harmonization issue!

Peacock

106,476 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Watch how Air Canada Collided With a Fire Truck at LaGuardia Sunday night, March 22, 2026. LaGuardia Airport is already stretched thin. A United Airlines flight has aborted its takeoff after an anti-ice warning light comes on, flight attendants in the back are feeling ill from an unknown odor, and the crew declares an emergency when no gates are immediately available. A Port Authority fire truck, Truck 1, is dispatched to respond. At the same time, Air Canada Express Flight 8646, a Jazz Aviation Bombardier CRJ-900 operating from Montreal Trudeau International Airport, is on final approach to Runway 4. The lone controller on duty, simultaneously managing both ground and tower operations, clears Truck 1 to cross the runway. Seconds later, as Flight 8646 is landing at between 93 and 105 miles per hour, he realises his mistake. He calls for the truck to stop. Over and over. It is too late. The CRJ-900 strikes the fire truck on Runway 4. The impact destroys the cockpit and tears open the front fuselage. Both pilots are killed. A Delta flight on approach is sent around. Jazz 646 comes to rest on the runway, its nose elevated, its cockpit gone. LaGuardia closes entirely. 72 passengers and four crew members were on board. 41 people are taken to hospital. The fire truck had been sent to help one emergency. It became another. (Disclaimer: This is an estimated recreation of the event using Microsoft Flight Simulator, based on publicly available data and real ATC audio. There may be slight variations in timing, aircraft positioning, and other factors. Unrelated ATC audio might be trimmed out. This video does not depict the exact sequence or conditions of the actual event.) Real ATC Audio by #Aviation #AirCanada #LaGuardia #RunwayIncursion #AviationAccident
1:54

Watch how Air Canada Collided With a Fire Truck at LaGuardia Sunday night, March 22, 2026. LaGuardia Airport is already stretched thin. A United Airlines flight has aborted its takeoff after an anti-ice warning light comes on, flight attendants in the back are feeling ill from an unknown odor, and the crew declares an emergency when no gates are immediately available. A Port Authority fire truck, Truck 1, is dispatched to respond. At the same time, Air Canada Express Flight 8646, a Jazz Aviation Bombardier CRJ-900 operating from Montreal Trudeau International Airport, is on final approach to Runway 4. The lone controller on duty, simultaneously managing both ground and tower operations, clears Truck 1 to cross the runway. Seconds later, as Flight 8646 is landing at between 93 and 105 miles per hour, he realises his mistake. He calls for the truck to stop. Over and over. It is too late. The CRJ-900 strikes the fire truck on Runway 4. The impact destroys the cockpit and tears open the front fuselage. Both pilots are killed. A Delta flight on approach is sent around. Jazz 646 comes to rest on the runway, its nose elevated, its cockpit gone. LaGuardia closes entirely. 72 passengers and four crew members were on board. 41 people are taken to hospital. The fire truck had been sent to help one emergency. It became another. (Disclaimer: This is an estimated recreation of the event using Microsoft Flight Simulator, based on publicly available data and real ATC audio. There may be slight variations in timing, aircraft positioning, and other factors. Unrelated ATC audio might be trimmed out. This video does not depict the exact sequence or conditions of the actual event.) Real ATC Audio by #Aviation #AirCanada #LaGuardia #RunwayIncursion #AviationAccident

Dami’ Adenuga

2,629,601 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

I’m Never Going To Stop Sharing This National News Segment Blaming BlackRock For The Lahaina, Maui, Hawaii Fires There Was So Much Independent Journalist & First Hand Victim Evidence That Came Out All To Have Absolutely Nothing Followed Up On & No One Held Accountable. WE WILL NOT FORGET MAUI “It's stunning to monitor the media's lack of interest in the whole Maui story. I've been in this business for 30 years. I'm stunned, but I'm not surprised. The incident seems to be the story here, right? But the true story, the media knows it is not allowed to tell. Is it a coincidence that the Maui police chief is the same man who was in charge in Las Vegas during that massacre that killed 58 people? Is it a coincidence that the Maui property, owned by million and billionaires, wasn't touched by the flames while homes of the locals all burned? What she fails to also mention is how the media hasn't even once interviewed a grieving parent. Not a single parent looking for their children. Not a single interview with a child. Not a single interview with the schools. Was it a coincidence that the largest system of outdoor emergency sirens in the world never made a sound as the fire devoured Lahaina. Was it a coincidence that at the same time, very same time, all the water was turned off? Was it a coincidence that police were ordered to block off streets and to funnel all the cars trying to escape? Think about this coincidence. That governor also signed an emergency proclamation on July 17th, three weeks before the fire, about housing of all things. Is it a coincidence that the government put up a black fence around Lahaina? Or that the FAA grounded all drones from flying over the affected areas? Is it a coincidence that since at least 2011 there have been plans to make Maui the first smart city run by 100% renewable energy? And that it must be a coincidence then that the locals whose homes did not burn are now being evicted from their property? And of course, a total coincidence that all the fact checkers who are checking these facts who say everything I just told you is just a coincidence are also owned and run by BlackRock.” DEWs, Directed Energy Weapons #Hawaii #Maui #MauiFires #Lahaina #LahainaFires #DEWs #DirectedEnergyWeapons
1:48

I’m Never Going To Stop Sharing This National News Segment Blaming BlackRock For The Lahaina, Maui, Hawaii Fires There Was So Much Independent Journalist & First Hand Victim Evidence That Came Out All To Have Absolutely Nothing Followed Up On & No One Held Accountable. WE WILL NOT FORGET MAUI “It's stunning to monitor the media's lack of interest in the whole Maui story. I've been in this business for 30 years. I'm stunned, but I'm not surprised. The incident seems to be the story here, right? But the true story, the media knows it is not allowed to tell. Is it a coincidence that the Maui police chief is the same man who was in charge in Las Vegas during that massacre that killed 58 people? Is it a coincidence that the Maui property, owned by million and billionaires, wasn't touched by the flames while homes of the locals all burned? What she fails to also mention is how the media hasn't even once interviewed a grieving parent. Not a single parent looking for their children. Not a single interview with a child. Not a single interview with the schools. Was it a coincidence that the largest system of outdoor emergency sirens in the world never made a sound as the fire devoured Lahaina. Was it a coincidence that at the same time, very same time, all the water was turned off? Was it a coincidence that police were ordered to block off streets and to funnel all the cars trying to escape? Think about this coincidence. That governor also signed an emergency proclamation on July 17th, three weeks before the fire, about housing of all things. Is it a coincidence that the government put up a black fence around Lahaina? Or that the FAA grounded all drones from flying over the affected areas? Is it a coincidence that since at least 2011 there have been plans to make Maui the first smart city run by 100% renewable energy? And that it must be a coincidence then that the locals whose homes did not burn are now being evicted from their property? And of course, a total coincidence that all the fact checkers who are checking these facts who say everything I just told you is just a coincidence are also owned and run by BlackRock.” DEWs, Directed Energy Weapons #Hawaii #Maui #MauiFires #Lahaina #LahainaFires #DEWs #DirectedEnergyWeapons

Wall Street Apes

198,952 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🚨 I WARNED YOU. THE 2026 BUBBLE IS ABOUT TO POP!!! Look at the chart. Two red circles. Two bubbles. 2006 and 2026 - both landing on the exact same marker: a "Good Times, High Prices, time to sell" year on a cycle map drawn 150 years ago. Here's why that should stop you cold. The last time this signal pointed here, it was 2006. Prices had blown past every historical ceiling into a record bubble. Everyone "knew" it only went up. The cycle said sell. Almost nobody did. You know what came next. 2008. It didn't just correct it took the banks, the credit system, and the entire stock market down with it. The S&P lost more than half its value. It wasn't a housing problem. It was an everything problem. Now look at 2026. Same B-year. Same "sell" signal. But a bigger bubble. Inflation-adjusted prices today are sitting above the 2006 peak - the literal top that caused the last crisis. Except this time it's not just one market. Stocks are at record highs. Valuations are at dot-com extremes. Credit is stretched. The whole system is inflated at once, all resting on the same tightening liquidity. 2006 was a warning that took two years to detonate. That's the danger of slow bubbles - they look calm right up until they're not. And here's the part most people are missing: this one isn't waiting. It's already cracking. This week alone - Korea down 10% in a single day, a global tech rout, the S&P sliding straight off its record high. The unwind everyone assumed was years away is printing on the screen right now. You don't have to believe a 19th-century cycle secretly runs the market. You just have to notice that the same marker which nailed the 2006 top is flashing again and this time, reality already started agreeing with it. The bubble doesn't ask permission before it pops. It just pops. And it's started.
0:32

🚨 I WARNED YOU. THE 2026 BUBBLE IS ABOUT TO POP!!! Look at the chart. Two red circles. Two bubbles. 2006 and 2026 - both landing on the exact same marker: a "Good Times, High Prices, time to sell" year on a cycle map drawn 150 years ago. Here's why that should stop you cold. The last time this signal pointed here, it was 2006. Prices had blown past every historical ceiling into a record bubble. Everyone "knew" it only went up. The cycle said sell. Almost nobody did. You know what came next. 2008. It didn't just correct it took the banks, the credit system, and the entire stock market down with it. The S&P lost more than half its value. It wasn't a housing problem. It was an everything problem. Now look at 2026. Same B-year. Same "sell" signal. But a bigger bubble. Inflation-adjusted prices today are sitting above the 2006 peak - the literal top that caused the last crisis. Except this time it's not just one market. Stocks are at record highs. Valuations are at dot-com extremes. Credit is stretched. The whole system is inflated at once, all resting on the same tightening liquidity. 2006 was a warning that took two years to detonate. That's the danger of slow bubbles - they look calm right up until they're not. And here's the part most people are missing: this one isn't waiting. It's already cracking. This week alone - Korea down 10% in a single day, a global tech rout, the S&P sliding straight off its record high. The unwind everyone assumed was years away is printing on the screen right now. You don't have to believe a 19th-century cycle secretly runs the market. You just have to notice that the same marker which nailed the 2006 top is flashing again and this time, reality already started agreeing with it. The bubble doesn't ask permission before it pops. It just pops. And it's started.

Shelpid.WI3M

63,709 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

.Google Cloud killed its own opening video 3 weeks before Google Cloud Next. In rehearsals, VP of Marketing Sarah Kennedy Ellis looked at the opener her team had built and called it. It was using AI, but not enough of it to actually showcase what the product could do. So they rebuilt it from scratch. In 3 weeks. Here's how it came together, straight from her SaaStr AI 2026 session: - It started on a napkin. A creative director sketched the concept by hand, then fed it into Nano Banana to generate the source images and inspiration. - The story was Google's own history. The 1998 origin garage. Dino. The original server rack that was actually built out of Legos. 138 Easter eggs packed into the video, prompted from Google's own lore. - Then they added motion with Veo and stitched it all together with a few custom agents built on the Gemini Enterprise platform. - The agents improvised. They prompted for balls representing customers, and the model added a burst of water that was nowhere in the brief. It injected its own creativity into a physical, on-stage moment. - The hardest part was the most physical: resolution. Max output was 4K. The screen at Next is the size of a 737. They had to upres from 4K to 12K using a custom Deep Mind model, the same one used for the Wizard of Oz production at the Sphere. Top Takeaways: 1️⃣ The old version of this project needed an agency, a much bigger budget, and a lot more than 3 weeks. That whole path collapsed into an internal team using their own tools. 2️⃣ And the same video was impossible a year earlier. They tried similar work the prior year and it was too early, mostly because of the upres wall. Twelve months later it shipped on the biggest screen they had.
1:32

.Google Cloud killed its own opening video 3 weeks before Google Cloud Next. In rehearsals, VP of Marketing Sarah Kennedy Ellis looked at the opener her team had built and called it. It was using AI, but not enough of it to actually showcase what the product could do. So they rebuilt it from scratch. In 3 weeks. Here's how it came together, straight from her SaaStr AI 2026 session: - It started on a napkin. A creative director sketched the concept by hand, then fed it into Nano Banana to generate the source images and inspiration. - The story was Google's own history. The 1998 origin garage. Dino. The original server rack that was actually built out of Legos. 138 Easter eggs packed into the video, prompted from Google's own lore. - Then they added motion with Veo and stitched it all together with a few custom agents built on the Gemini Enterprise platform. - The agents improvised. They prompted for balls representing customers, and the model added a burst of water that was nowhere in the brief. It injected its own creativity into a physical, on-stage moment. - The hardest part was the most physical: resolution. Max output was 4K. The screen at Next is the size of a 737. They had to upres from 4K to 12K using a custom Deep Mind model, the same one used for the Wizard of Oz production at the Sphere. Top Takeaways: 1️⃣ The old version of this project needed an agency, a much bigger budget, and a lot more than 3 weeks. That whole path collapsed into an internal team using their own tools. 2️⃣ And the same video was impossible a year earlier. They tried similar work the prior year and it was too early, mostly because of the upres wall. Twelve months later it shipped on the biggest screen they had.

Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin

18,937 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

And on today´s bizarre aviation occurrence... Past Tuesday (March 19), a Boeing 777-200 LR took off from Delhi bound for Vancouver, Canada. After four hours of flight, Chinese air traffic control reminded the pilots that this might not be the right aircraft for the route. Why? Because the agreement with Canadian authorities only authorised the Boeing 777-300ER to operate that service. A quick call back to base in Delhi confirmed that someone had been dozing off a bit more than they should have when the flight was planned. Result: the plane turned around and landed back at the departure point after 7 hours and 54 minutes of flying… to nowhere. Now, knowing that a B777 burns a modest 9 tonnes of fuel per hour… well, just do the maths. Of course, Air India blamed the usual “operational reasons” for the incident—especially at a time when fuel is getting more expensive by the day and starting to run short all over the world. The passengers, it seems, weren’t particularly convinced. I hint that someone will be invited to a "coffeeless meeting" with its boss after this mess up... ℹ️WS. Aviation
0:28

And on today´s bizarre aviation occurrence... Past Tuesday (March 19), a Boeing 777-200 LR took off from Delhi bound for Vancouver, Canada. After four hours of flight, Chinese air traffic control reminded the pilots that this might not be the right aircraft for the route. Why? Because the agreement with Canadian authorities only authorised the Boeing 777-300ER to operate that service. A quick call back to base in Delhi confirmed that someone had been dozing off a bit more than they should have when the flight was planned. Result: the plane turned around and landed back at the departure point after 7 hours and 54 minutes of flying… to nowhere. Now, knowing that a B777 burns a modest 9 tonnes of fuel per hour… well, just do the maths. Of course, Air India blamed the usual “operational reasons” for the incident—especially at a time when fuel is getting more expensive by the day and starting to run short all over the world. The passengers, it seems, weren’t particularly convinced. I hint that someone will be invited to a "coffeeless meeting" with its boss after this mess up... ℹ️WS. Aviation

Air Safety #OTD by Francisco Cunha

385,282 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

🚨🇮🇷Real Reason Pentagon Is Losing Sleep: Iranian Top Drones Tehran has developed a diverse fleet of strike drones designed for different combat roles. In addition to the famous Shaheds, here are the top-notch Iranian drones that keep Pentagon planners awake at night: 1️⃣ Mohajer-6 — The tactical backbone of Iran's proxy forces. This drone is a battlefield multiplier, equipped with electro-optical sensors and capable of firing the Almas anti-tank missile with pinpoint accuracy. It has been exported and used in conflicts from the Caucasus to the Red Sea, systematically destroying armored vehicles and fortifications; 2️⃣ Mohajer-10 — The next evolution in strike capability. It boasts triple the range (2,000 km) and double the flight endurance (24 hours) of its predecessor. Most critically, it can carry a 300 kg payload, including up to six smart bombs or cruise missiles, allowing it to saturate small sections of an air defense network; 3️⃣ Kaman-22 — Iran's "wide-body" combat drone. With a 3,000 km range, it can reach the furthest US outposts. It carries a 300 kg payload of air-to-ground missiles and glide bombs, designed to hit command centers and radar sites deep behind enemy lines, far from the front; 4️⃣ Karrar — The jet-powered speed demon. Unlike propeller drones, the Karrar races to its target at high subsonic speeds. It can be configured as a swarm leader or as a "mini-cruise missile" itself, carrying a 225 kg warhead to strike time-sensitive targets before defenses can react; 5️⃣ Fotros — The heavy hitter. With a 2,000 km range and a 30-hour flight time, it carries up to six missiles. Its large airframe allows for powerful, advanced communication relays, meaning it can guide other drones or missiles to their targets while staying outside the immediate kill zone; 6️⃣ Arash-2 — A loitering munition specifically designed to hunt radars. Once a US Patriot or THAAD battery turns on its radar, the Arash-2, with a range exceeding 1,000 km, can home in on that emission and destroy the system, effectively blinding the base's air defense; 7️⃣ Hadid-110 (Dalaho) — A jet-powered stealth loitering munition fresh from real combat. It hits 510 km/h with a radar cross-section below 0.02 square meters, evading F-15E and E-3C detection. With a 350 km range and a 30 kg warhead, it precisely targets Persian Gulf infrastructure, slipping past Western defenses silently; 8️⃣ Meraj-521 — A man-portable loitering munition that fits in a backpack. With a 5 km range and interchangeable 500g-1kg warheads, it silently strikes bunkers and armor via live video feed. Launched in swarms from ground or air, it dismantles fortified positions without exposing a single soldier to return fire.
1:06

🚨🇮🇷Real Reason Pentagon Is Losing Sleep: Iranian Top Drones Tehran has developed a diverse fleet of strike drones designed for different combat roles. In addition to the famous Shaheds, here are the top-notch Iranian drones that keep Pentagon planners awake at night: 1️⃣ Mohajer-6 — The tactical backbone of Iran's proxy forces. This drone is a battlefield multiplier, equipped with electro-optical sensors and capable of firing the Almas anti-tank missile with pinpoint accuracy. It has been exported and used in conflicts from the Caucasus to the Red Sea, systematically destroying armored vehicles and fortifications; 2️⃣ Mohajer-10 — The next evolution in strike capability. It boasts triple the range (2,000 km) and double the flight endurance (24 hours) of its predecessor. Most critically, it can carry a 300 kg payload, including up to six smart bombs or cruise missiles, allowing it to saturate small sections of an air defense network; 3️⃣ Kaman-22 — Iran's "wide-body" combat drone. With a 3,000 km range, it can reach the furthest US outposts. It carries a 300 kg payload of air-to-ground missiles and glide bombs, designed to hit command centers and radar sites deep behind enemy lines, far from the front; 4️⃣ Karrar — The jet-powered speed demon. Unlike propeller drones, the Karrar races to its target at high subsonic speeds. It can be configured as a swarm leader or as a "mini-cruise missile" itself, carrying a 225 kg warhead to strike time-sensitive targets before defenses can react; 5️⃣ Fotros — The heavy hitter. With a 2,000 km range and a 30-hour flight time, it carries up to six missiles. Its large airframe allows for powerful, advanced communication relays, meaning it can guide other drones or missiles to their targets while staying outside the immediate kill zone; 6️⃣ Arash-2 — A loitering munition specifically designed to hunt radars. Once a US Patriot or THAAD battery turns on its radar, the Arash-2, with a range exceeding 1,000 km, can home in on that emission and destroy the system, effectively blinding the base's air defense; 7️⃣ Hadid-110 (Dalaho) — A jet-powered stealth loitering munition fresh from real combat. It hits 510 km/h with a radar cross-section below 0.02 square meters, evading F-15E and E-3C detection. With a 350 km range and a 30 kg warhead, it precisely targets Persian Gulf infrastructure, slipping past Western defenses silently; 8️⃣ Meraj-521 — A man-portable loitering munition that fits in a backpack. With a 5 km range and interchangeable 500g-1kg warheads, it silently strikes bunkers and armor via live video feed. Launched in swarms from ground or air, it dismantles fortified positions without exposing a single soldier to return fire.

𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝 𝐙 🇷🇺🇮🇪

63,109 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

🚨 EXPOSED: How Frank Turek Just ACCIDENTALLY Exposed The Sept 10th Cover-Up—Erika Had To Have Allegedly Traveled On An EARLIER Flight To Utah 😱 Candace Owens just broke down a massive new piece of the puzzle regarding the timeline of September 10th, and it completely shatters the official story about the infamous "tarmac hug" between Andrew Kolvet and Erika Kirk. If you thought the timeline was messy before, wait until you see this math. THE FRANK TUREK TIMELINE Frank Turek (a former Navy officer and one of the only people who hasn't been caught lying in this entire saga) gave an interview detailing the events at the hospital. Because he is a military man, he is incredibly precise with time. He stated on the record that Erika Kirk arrived at the hospital around 4:00 PM. THE LOGISTICAL IMPOSSIBILITY Here is why that completely destroys the official narrative: TPUSA and Erika claim that she met Andrew Kolvet on the runway when his plane landed from Santa Barbara. The problem? That plane didn't land in Provo until 4:40 PM. * It is a 20-minute drive from the airport to the hospital with zero traffic. By the time you factor in deplaning, the emotional tarmac hug, moving to the cars, and driving to the hospital in the middle of an active manhunt with SWAT teams everywhere, the absolute earliest they could have arrived at the hospital is 5:15 PM. If Erika met Andrew's plane at 4:40 PM, she could not have been at the hospital at 4:00 PM. The math is impossible. THE ONLY WAY IT WORKS Candace believes both Frank Turek AND Andrew Kolvet are telling the truth. She believes the tarmac hug really happened, and she believes they arrived at the hospital at 4:00 PM. There is only one way both of those things can be true: Erika Kirk had to have flown into Utah on an entirely different, earlier flight. And the only plane that fits that timeline? Charlie Kirk's plane, which landed at 3:31 PM. That would give them exactly enough time to have the tarmac hug, deplane, get a police escort, and arrive at the hospital by 4:00 PM, exactly as Frank Turek stated. THE BOTTOM LINE Every time we find a discrepancy between Andrew Kolvet's story and Erika Kirk's story, it turns out Erika is the one lying. She threw Andrew under the bus regarding the 30-06 caliber text, and she is throwing him under the bus now. Erika was not on that 4:40 PM flight. The official story is a fabrication. 🇺🇸⚓️ FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL podcast below. 👇
7:21

🚨 EXPOSED: How Frank Turek Just ACCIDENTALLY Exposed The Sept 10th Cover-Up—Erika Had To Have Allegedly Traveled On An EARLIER Flight To Utah 😱 Candace Owens just broke down a massive new piece of the puzzle regarding the timeline of September 10th, and it completely shatters the official story about the infamous "tarmac hug" between Andrew Kolvet and Erika Kirk. If you thought the timeline was messy before, wait until you see this math. THE FRANK TUREK TIMELINE Frank Turek (a former Navy officer and one of the only people who hasn't been caught lying in this entire saga) gave an interview detailing the events at the hospital. Because he is a military man, he is incredibly precise with time. He stated on the record that Erika Kirk arrived at the hospital around 4:00 PM. THE LOGISTICAL IMPOSSIBILITY Here is why that completely destroys the official narrative: TPUSA and Erika claim that she met Andrew Kolvet on the runway when his plane landed from Santa Barbara. The problem? That plane didn't land in Provo until 4:40 PM. * It is a 20-minute drive from the airport to the hospital with zero traffic. By the time you factor in deplaning, the emotional tarmac hug, moving to the cars, and driving to the hospital in the middle of an active manhunt with SWAT teams everywhere, the absolute earliest they could have arrived at the hospital is 5:15 PM. If Erika met Andrew's plane at 4:40 PM, she could not have been at the hospital at 4:00 PM. The math is impossible. THE ONLY WAY IT WORKS Candace believes both Frank Turek AND Andrew Kolvet are telling the truth. She believes the tarmac hug really happened, and she believes they arrived at the hospital at 4:00 PM. There is only one way both of those things can be true: Erika Kirk had to have flown into Utah on an entirely different, earlier flight. And the only plane that fits that timeline? Charlie Kirk's plane, which landed at 3:31 PM. That would give them exactly enough time to have the tarmac hug, deplane, get a police escort, and arrive at the hospital by 4:00 PM, exactly as Frank Turek stated. THE BOTTOM LINE Every time we find a discrepancy between Andrew Kolvet's story and Erika Kirk's story, it turns out Erika is the one lying. She threw Andrew under the bus regarding the 30-06 caliber text, and she is throwing him under the bus now. Erika was not on that 4:40 PM flight. The official story is a fabrication. 🇺🇸⚓️ FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL podcast below. 👇

Project Constitution

29,209 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten