Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

🔧 Not all compute is created equal. Premium partners like Exabits? Always top-tier. Zero spoofing. Maximum reliability. “We had to build serious internal infrastructure to make sure no one could game the system. That includes benchmarking, anti-spoofing, and token slashing for unreliable hosts. Partners like Exabits meet the gold... show more

Exabits

87,326 subscribers

18,202 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

A month ago me and my friends were just sitting around thinking why not do this. Why not actually build something that helps ideas turn into real products fast. That’s how Hue Studio was born. Our core team is small but strong. 2 software engineers and 1 designer. We wanted to create a place where we could take any idea and help it come to life. Together with our partners we are ready to help founders and teams ship MVPs faster than ever. We do everything from design and branding to full-stack development. You focus on your vision and we make sure the product, the brand and the experience all come together perfectly. We don’t cut corners and we don’t compromise. Every detail matters. We are technology agnostic. Web apps, mobile apps, dashboards, AI tools, SaaS products, whatever your idea needs we figure out the best way to make it happen. This is not just a studio. This is a team that wants to see your idea move from zero to one as fast as possible with quality and care at every step. Check out our video and see what we have been working on. If you like what you see request a spot before we fill up. We only take a limited number of projects each month to make sure every client gets our full attention. Let’s make your idea real.

Can Vardar

37,476 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

One of Chainlink's core value props is that it is a neutral technology platform that does not compete with its customers Specifically, Chainlink is not a blockchain, and does not compete with blockchains Rather, Chainlink enhances the utility of all public/private chains by providing the oracle services their ecosystems need to succeed long-term This neutrality is why Chainlink has *thousands* of blockchain, Web3, and TradFi partners who rely on Chainlink for critical functionalities including: - Onchain data delivery - Cross-chain interoperability - Automated compliance - Privacy-preserving compute - Legacy system integration - Multi-system workflow orchestration As the cost and friction of launching a blockchain continues to drop toward zero, the number of public/private chains that exist will expand from hundreds today to thousands in the future If a cross-chain provider wants to pivot by launching their own blockchain and begin competing with Ethereum, Solana, Canton, and all of their existing blockchain partners, I wish them luck on that That’s not the game Chainlink is playing While blockchains fiercely compete amongst each other to become the transactional database layer, Chainlink wins regardless of which chains are used For Chainlink, every new blockchain introduced to the market is all the more justification for why organizations need Chainlink as their orchestration layer to manage the complexity That’s why financial market infrastructure providers like Swift, DTCC, Euroclear, and more have adopted Chainlink, they understand the financial system needs an orchestration layer To emphasize my point, here is a clip from DTCC executives explaining how the rapidly growing number of blockchains is why their partnership with Chainlink is so important

One of Chainlink's core value props is that it is a neutral technology platform that does not compete with its customers Specifically, Chainlink is not a blockchain, and does not compete with blockchains Rather, Chainlink enhances the utility of all public/private chains by providing the oracle services their ecosystems need to succeed long-term This neutrality is why Chainlink has thousands of blockchain, Web3, and TradFi partners who rely on Chainlink for critical functionalities including: - Onchain data delivery - Cross-chain interoperability - Automated compliance - Privacy-preserving compute - Legacy system integration - Multi-system workflow orchestration As the cost and friction of launching a blockchain continues to drop toward zero, the number of public/private chains that exist will expand from hundreds today to thousands in the future If a cross-chain provider wants to pivot by launching their own blockchain and begin competing with Ethereum, Solana, Canton, and all of their existing blockchain partners, I wish them luck on that That’s not the game Chainlink is playing While blockchains fiercely compete amongst each other to become the transactional database layer, Chainlink wins regardless of which chains are used For Chainlink, every new blockchain introduced to the market is all the more justification for why organizations need Chainlink as their orchestration layer to manage the complexity That’s why financial market infrastructure providers like Swift, DTCC, Euroclear, and more have adopted Chainlink, they understand the financial system needs an orchestration layer To emphasize my point, here is a clip from DTCC executives explaining how the rapidly growing number of blockchains is why their partnership with Chainlink is so important

Zach Rynes | CLG

13,309 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman reveals the assumption about superintelligence he thinks the other AI labs have backwards "Some of the other labs are making an assumption that a superintelligence that is smarter than all of us put together is both inevitable and even desirable. And that such a system would probably be very hard to control" "We have to reset that and make the assumption that we should only bring a system like that into the world that we are sure we can control, that operates in a subordinate way to us, that humans remain at the top of the food chain" "These tools, like any other past technology, are designed to enhance human wellbeing and serve humanity. Not exceed humanity" "Some of the things that you hear from Elon often, or even others in the field - they're fixating on a world in 2050 or 2075 when they're going off exploring other universes and conquering resources from other planets. A system like that, it is unclear to me how it would have any time for preserving us as a species" "We have to make a decision as a species to prioritize creating superintelligences that are aligned, that care about humans and want to protect humans. If we just accelerate and cut all those corners, we're taking a massive risk with the future of our species" He calls it humanist superintelligence: build it only if it is provably controllable, subordinate, and pointed at human wellbeing. The uncomfortable part: "provably controllable" is a standard nobody in the industry can verify yet.

Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman reveals the assumption about superintelligence he thinks the other AI labs have backwards "Some of the other labs are making an assumption that a superintelligence that is smarter than all of us put together is both inevitable and even desirable. And that such a system would probably be very hard to control" "We have to reset that and make the assumption that we should only bring a system like that into the world that we are sure we can control, that operates in a subordinate way to us, that humans remain at the top of the food chain" "These tools, like any other past technology, are designed to enhance human wellbeing and serve humanity. Not exceed humanity" "Some of the things that you hear from Elon often, or even others in the field - they're fixating on a world in 2050 or 2075 when they're going off exploring other universes and conquering resources from other planets. A system like that, it is unclear to me how it would have any time for preserving us as a species" "We have to make a decision as a species to prioritize creating superintelligences that are aligned, that care about humans and want to protect humans. If we just accelerate and cut all those corners, we're taking a massive risk with the future of our species" He calls it humanist superintelligence: build it only if it is provably controllable, subordinate, and pointed at human wellbeing. The uncomfortable part: "provably controllable" is a standard nobody in the industry can verify yet.

Karl Mehta

15,004 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

To our community, clients, and partners, We are closing the year with clarity. This has been Brickken’s best year. We began by announcing a 2.5m raise backed by venture capital firms that invested in execution, not noise. We used that capital to do what matters in this industry: ship product, secure strategic distribution, and build infrastructure that institutions can rely on. This year Brickken became an official tokenization provider for ecosystems such as MANTRA | The EVM L1 for RWAs and XDC Network . These are not symbolic partnerships. They are aligned networks with real demand, long term relevance, and a clear path to institutional scale. We chose partners that are building on chain capital markets, and we are building with them. We also delivered the full product stack. • Our web application is live and production ready. • Our white label platform is live for institutions that need brand control and compliant operations. • Our API is live for teams that require deep integration into existing systems. Brickken is not a promise. It is operational infrastructure. That execution turned into measurable traction. We closed the year with 41m in TVL and surpassed 100 active clients. These are real businesses deploying real assets, running real issuance flows, and building long term programs on Brickken . Tokenization is no longer a concept. It is becoming financial infrastructure, and Brickken is already operating in that reality. The market context matters. Crypto markets faced pressure and the BKN token moved with the cycle. That is not unique to Brickken, it is systemic. What matters is how a company performs when conditions are not easy. We stayed disciplined. We kept shipping. We kept onboarding. We protected the long term plan. This is where our community proved its strength. Your commitment is not passive support, it is a strategic advantage. • The token matters because it is part of the ecosystem we are building. • Our clients matter because they validate product market fit with capital and repetition. • Our partners matter because they expand distribution and credibility. Together, this forms a single system built on trust, alignment, and execution. Now to what comes next. 2026 is the year Brickken steps into leadership. We are contributing to the standards that will define the market, including ERC 7943, because leadership belongs to the builders who shape the rules and deliver the rails. Brickken has a voice in this ecosystem, and it is increasingly referenced and followed for one reason: we execute. We have what it takes to lead at scale. • The team. • The know how. • The product. • The treasuries. • The institutional relationships. • The discipline to keep building through any cycle. We always said we wanted to be a tokenization platform. That ambition has matured. Now the objective is unambiguous: To become the tokenization platform. Competitors can keep talking. We will keep delivering. The gap will not close, it will widen. Our goal is singular: unicorn scale built on real infrastructure, real adoption, and long term value creation. Thank you for building this with us. The foundation is complete. The next phase begins now. Edwin Mata CEO and Co Founder Brickken

Brickken

11,946 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Whitney Webb just exposed the truth about Palantir’s origins. It was created to privatize mass surveillance. “Don’t tell me this is a conspiracy theory.” “Alex Karp admitted that the CIA was always the intended client of Palantir.” Webb and Mark Goodwin just broke down the truth about Palantir’s origins: After 9/11, DARPA launched the Information Awareness Office to develop a government mass surveillance apparatus. Reagan-era National Security Advisor John Poindexter led the new IAO. After massive public scrutiny and backlash, Congress defunded it. But the program never really shut down. It was moved into the private sector with the help of Peter Thiel and Alex Karp. Webb: “Peter Thiel comes, fresh off of selling PayPal … he’s got all this money, and he’s like: I’m gonna make this company called Palantir.” “Palantir … had really started off as the anti-fraud algorithm at PayPal.” “When PayPal was being created, Max Levchin sort of gave it away.” Goodwin revealed that Max Levchin essentially admitted in an interview at the time: “When I was developing all the anti-fraud stuff at PayPal, I was working with every three and four letter agency that I could.” “Meaning the CIA, and the DOD, and DARPA.” “They form PayPal in the late ‘90s.” “They make a bunch of money, and it’s Thiel and Levchin, admittedly working with the CIA and NSA, while developing this anti-fraud stuff.” “He takes that anti-fraud algorithm, which was built with the CIA in the private sector, and then rebrands it as Palantir.” Webb: “As they’re setting it up, they go through Richard Perle, who was involved with the Bush-era Department of Defense, and I believe the Office of Special Plans.” “He’s approached by Peter Thiel and Alex Karp.” “They’re basically like: we want to talk to John Poindexter, because what he was trying to do is what we want to do.” “They go and meet with Poindexter, who becomes named basically the godfather of modern surveillance because of this.” “He advises them on how to create Palantir.” “And then Palantir gets in bed pretty much right away with the CIA.” “They were their first and only client for their first six years.” Whitney Webb markgoodw.in

Whitney Webb just exposed the truth about Palantir’s origins. It was created to privatize mass surveillance. “Don’t tell me this is a conspiracy theory.” “Alex Karp admitted that the CIA was always the intended client of Palantir.” Webb and Mark Goodwin just broke down the truth about Palantir’s origins: After 9/11, DARPA launched the Information Awareness Office to develop a government mass surveillance apparatus. Reagan-era National Security Advisor John Poindexter led the new IAO. After massive public scrutiny and backlash, Congress defunded it. But the program never really shut down. It was moved into the private sector with the help of Peter Thiel and Alex Karp. Webb: “Peter Thiel comes, fresh off of selling PayPal … he’s got all this money, and he’s like: I’m gonna make this company called Palantir.” “Palantir … had really started off as the anti-fraud algorithm at PayPal.” “When PayPal was being created, Max Levchin sort of gave it away.” Goodwin revealed that Max Levchin essentially admitted in an interview at the time: “When I was developing all the anti-fraud stuff at PayPal, I was working with every three and four letter agency that I could.” “Meaning the CIA, and the DOD, and DARPA.” “They form PayPal in the late ‘90s.” “They make a bunch of money, and it’s Thiel and Levchin, admittedly working with the CIA and NSA, while developing this anti-fraud stuff.” “He takes that anti-fraud algorithm, which was built with the CIA in the private sector, and then rebrands it as Palantir.” Webb: “As they’re setting it up, they go through Richard Perle, who was involved with the Bush-era Department of Defense, and I believe the Office of Special Plans.” “He’s approached by Peter Thiel and Alex Karp.” “They’re basically like: we want to talk to John Poindexter, because what he was trying to do is what we want to do.” “They go and meet with Poindexter, who becomes named basically the godfather of modern surveillance because of this.” “He advises them on how to create Palantir.” “And then Palantir gets in bed pretty much right away with the CIA.” “They were their first and only client for their first six years.” Whitney Webb markgoodw.in

Holden Culotta

46,069 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

THERE IT IS 🚨 Official hearing in Minnesota reveals Tim Walz BLOCKED INVESTIGATIONS into “high priority” fraud cases - He SHUT DOWN criminal investigations - No new criminal investigations allowed - They changed the name from “calling it fraud to calling it over billing” - They were told they could no longer meet with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension agents - They created an entire department to make sure it was no longer called fraud and was called over billing It’s time to arrest Tim Walz “Do you have any examples of how the Walts administration blocked investigators from moving forward with high priority fraud investigations?” “Yes, we do, Mr. Chairman. I have met with whistleblowers and gotten documents from them about how after the original C-CAP whistleblower report came out in March and April of 2019, subsequent to that, there was an Office of Inspector General within DHS that had investigative authority to do surveillance, warrants, and seize, electronics and THRY WERE SHUT DOWN. They were told they could no longer do criminal investigations. They were told they could no longer meet with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension agents that were assigned to them without supervisors approval. And instead, when they found, one of the other members talked about how they changed the language. They went from calling it fraud to calling it over billing. And they created an over billing committee to all the investigative agents now couldn't do criminal investigations and they had to flag issue over billing and then and a committee would decide if any of that over billing would be recouped” “So they shut down criminal investigations. They created a committee to call it over billing and decide if over billing investigations would even try to this money. This is evidence that Tim Waltz is in. It sounds to me like Tim Waltz was directly involved here.“

THERE IT IS 🚨 Official hearing in Minnesota reveals Tim Walz BLOCKED INVESTIGATIONS into “high priority” fraud cases - He SHUT DOWN criminal investigations - No new criminal investigations allowed - They changed the name from “calling it fraud to calling it over billing” - They were told they could no longer meet with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension agents - They created an entire department to make sure it was no longer called fraud and was called over billing It’s time to arrest Tim Walz “Do you have any examples of how the Walts administration blocked investigators from moving forward with high priority fraud investigations?” “Yes, we do, Mr. Chairman. I have met with whistleblowers and gotten documents from them about how after the original C-CAP whistleblower report came out in March and April of 2019, subsequent to that, there was an Office of Inspector General within DHS that had investigative authority to do surveillance, warrants, and seize, electronics and THRY WERE SHUT DOWN. They were told they could no longer do criminal investigations. They were told they could no longer meet with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension agents that were assigned to them without supervisors approval. And instead, when they found, one of the other members talked about how they changed the language. They went from calling it fraud to calling it over billing. And they created an over billing committee to all the investigative agents now couldn't do criminal investigations and they had to flag issue over billing and then and a committee would decide if any of that over billing would be recouped” “So they shut down criminal investigations. They created a committee to call it over billing and decide if over billing investigations would even try to this money. This is evidence that Tim Waltz is in. It sounds to me like Tim Waltz was directly involved here.“

Wall Street Apes

5,556,661 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

We have begun clearing the illegal shanties and market stalls built along the median of the Lagos-Badagry Expressway. As we rebuild the Lagos-Badagry Expressway into a modern 10-lane highway, we cannot allow its median to become a market, a settlement or a site for illegal structures. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to trade, build makeshift shops or live on the median of a major highway. It is unsafe, illegal and unacceptable. We often compare Lagos with some of the world’s leading cities and ask why we cannot be like them. The truth is that those cities work because people respect public infrastructure and obey the rules. We cannot expect a world-class city while refusing to show the discipline needed to keep one. Dumping waste indiscriminately or building illegal structures along our highways will not move us forward. If we want a cleaner, safer and more organised Lagos, discipline and personal responsibility must become part of our everyday culture. That is how we build a city we can all be proud of.

We have begun clearing the illegal shanties and market stalls built along the median of the Lagos-Badagry Expressway. As we rebuild the Lagos-Badagry Expressway into a modern 10-lane highway, we cannot allow its median to become a market, a settlement or a site for illegal structures. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to trade, build makeshift shops or live on the median of a major highway. It is unsafe, illegal and unacceptable. We often compare Lagos with some of the world’s leading cities and ask why we cannot be like them. The truth is that those cities work because people respect public infrastructure and obey the rules. We cannot expect a world-class city while refusing to show the discipline needed to keep one. Dumping waste indiscriminately or building illegal structures along our highways will not move us forward. If we want a cleaner, safer and more organised Lagos, discipline and personal responsibility must become part of our everyday culture. That is how we build a city we can all be proud of.

Babajide Sanwo-Olu

389,807 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Former BlackRock fund manager Ed Dowd: "Everybody under the sun thinks a new monetary system is coming... [And] every commercial bank in the U.S. is now accumulating physical gold because they made it tier-one capital... So gold, gold, gold... [But] if we see a parabolic move in gold and silver soon that would really scare me. That means... something's really gone off the wheels behind the scenes in the global banking system." This clip of Dowd (Edward Dowd), a former BlackRock fund manager and co-founder of Phinance Technologies, is taken from an interview with Jesse Day (Jesse Day) posted to the Commodity Culture YouTube channel on February 28, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Everybody under the sun thinks a new monetary system is coming at some point and watch what they do, not what they say. And every central bank is accumulating gold. Every commercial bank in the US is now accumulating physical gold because they made it tier-one capital. "China's accumulating gold because they have to depreciate their currency to keep selling into the global markets. India keeps buying gold. So gold, gold, gold. "And also, we all know there's a global sovereign debt problem and people as we roll through time and the deficits get bigger and the demographics get worse, more and more people want an asset that's not someone else's liability, which is gold. "So gold is I think got long-term fundamentals that are great, that's strategic, tactical, it's a little more problematic. So you know, if you look at the charts of gold and silver they had, they've had tremendous moves going up into this part of the cycle, much like gold did going into the great financial crisis. "I don't want to predict what gold's going to do but if there is a you know, a general risk-off trade, gold and silver may participate in that because as people unwind leveraged bets and have to sell what they can not what they can not what they want to, it might take a hit like it did in the financial crisis. "But I want people to understand in the great financial crisis, gold went down quite a bit in the Lehman event and again we're not calling one, it did recover and go to new all time highs more quickly than the US stock market. "So I suspect if there is a pullback in gold or silver, it's a good buying opportunity. My best guess is that we consolidate sideways for a little bit and then that's what I'd like to see. That's a, that would be a healthy thing technically to see some consolidation and then another run-up. "If we see a parabolic move in gold and silver soon that would really scare me. That means something, something's really gone off the wheels behind the scenes in the, in, in the global banking system. And then usually a parabolic blow-off top means you don't want to be chasing it if it happens. "But long-term I love gold and silver, and I'd love to see it consolidate for a year or so. And if there's any kind of major sell off, I would accumulate some on dips—physical that is not the ETF."

Former BlackRock fund manager Ed Dowd: "Everybody under the sun thinks a new monetary system is coming... [And] every commercial bank in the U.S. is now accumulating physical gold because they made it tier-one capital... So gold, gold, gold... [But] if we see a parabolic move in gold and silver soon that would really scare me. That means... something's really gone off the wheels behind the scenes in the global banking system." This clip of Dowd (Edward Dowd), a former BlackRock fund manager and co-founder of Phinance Technologies, is taken from an interview with Jesse Day (Jesse Day) posted to the Commodity Culture YouTube channel on February 28, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Everybody under the sun thinks a new monetary system is coming at some point and watch what they do, not what they say. And every central bank is accumulating gold. Every commercial bank in the US is now accumulating physical gold because they made it tier-one capital. "China's accumulating gold because they have to depreciate their currency to keep selling into the global markets. India keeps buying gold. So gold, gold, gold. "And also, we all know there's a global sovereign debt problem and people as we roll through time and the deficits get bigger and the demographics get worse, more and more people want an asset that's not someone else's liability, which is gold. "So gold is I think got long-term fundamentals that are great, that's strategic, tactical, it's a little more problematic. So you know, if you look at the charts of gold and silver they had, they've had tremendous moves going up into this part of the cycle, much like gold did going into the great financial crisis. "I don't want to predict what gold's going to do but if there is a you know, a general risk-off trade, gold and silver may participate in that because as people unwind leveraged bets and have to sell what they can not what they can not what they want to, it might take a hit like it did in the financial crisis. "But I want people to understand in the great financial crisis, gold went down quite a bit in the Lehman event and again we're not calling one, it did recover and go to new all time highs more quickly than the US stock market. "So I suspect if there is a pullback in gold or silver, it's a good buying opportunity. My best guess is that we consolidate sideways for a little bit and then that's what I'd like to see. That's a, that would be a healthy thing technically to see some consolidation and then another run-up. "If we see a parabolic move in gold and silver soon that would really scare me. That means something, something's really gone off the wheels behind the scenes in the, in, in the global banking system. And then usually a parabolic blow-off top means you don't want to be chasing it if it happens. "But long-term I love gold and silver, and I'd love to see it consolidate for a year or so. And if there's any kind of major sell off, I would accumulate some on dips—physical that is not the ETF."

Sense Receptor

129,666 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

MrBeast reveals his plans to slowly phase out of being in every video over time “Normal companies it’s like the CEO at the top and it’s like a pyramid but for this kind of company it’s almost inverted cause I am the product and it’s like everyone depends on me and if I don’t show up and film we don’t upload” “I think the easiest forte is like America’s Got Talent or Shark Tank or whatever I’m one of the hosts for a few first few seasons and then I drive my audience they get it you see the format’s really good and then I could phase out over time and they keep watching cause it’s a very high quality great show” “I could be there for 70% of the video maybe not 100% and ideally we’re making 20 30 40 hit shows a year we have dozens of YouTube channels but I can’t be in all of them nor do I want to that would be way too much work”

MrBeast reveals his plans to slowly phase out of being in every video over time “Normal companies it’s like the CEO at the top and it’s like a pyramid but for this kind of company it’s almost inverted cause I am the product and it’s like everyone depends on me and if I don’t show up and film we don’t upload” “I think the easiest forte is like America’s Got Talent or Shark Tank or whatever I’m one of the hosts for a few first few seasons and then I drive my audience they get it you see the format’s really good and then I could phase out over time and they keep watching cause it’s a very high quality great show” “I could be there for 70% of the video maybe not 100% and ideally we’re making 20 30 40 hit shows a year we have dozens of YouTube channels but I can’t be in all of them nor do I want to that would be way too much work”

Third

419,145 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Jensen Huang just delivered the most important warning no one in Washington is ready to hear. Not about China. About what America is doing to itself. Huang: “We should always have the best technology here. We should always have the most technology here, and the first. But we should also try to compete and win around the world.” Washington heard that and locked onto China. Jensen wasn’t talking about China. He was talking about India. The Middle East. Africa. Southeast Asia. The next two billion people coming online. All of them about to build on somebody’s AI stack. The question was never whether they get the technology. The question is whose name is on it. Huang: “It requires some amount of nuance, some amount of maturity, instead of absolutes. The world is just not absolute.” Washington doesn’t do nuance. Washington does ban lists. Restriction is now the entire American AI strategy. Not deployment. Not adoption. Not global capture. Restriction. As if you win a technology race by refusing to run it. And nobody in Washington understands what happens when you cut somebody off. They don’t stop. They build their own. Every restriction is an invitation to innovate without you. Every ban is a blueprint for independence. Every chip you refuse to sell is a chip someone else learns how to make. You are not slowing competitors down. You are giving them the one thing they never had before. Motivation to never need you again. That is not a hypothetical. That is the pattern. Every single time. Countries that cannot count on American access stop waiting for it. They invest. They recruit. They accelerate. They make breakthroughs they never would have made if Washington had just shown up and competed. You don’t contain progress by withholding it. You pour jet fuel on the one outcome you were trying to prevent. Meanwhile the people making these decisions have never built anything. Not a chip. Not a model. Not a product. Not a company. Bureaucrats writing regulation for an industry they cannot even describe accurately. Committees moving at the speed of subcommittee. And the entire American AI future is being filtered through people whose greatest technological achievement is a shared Google Doc. And here is what no one in that room wants to admit. The United States is not competing against Chinese technology. It is competing against Chinese willingness to show up. While Congress debates which chips to block, Beijing is already on a plane. Signing infrastructure deals across four continents. Not with better hardware. With available hardware. And available has beaten superior in every technology war ever fought. VHS over Betamax. Android over iOS globally. The best product never wins. The most adopted one does. Standards are not products. Standards are dependency. The kind that compounds for generations. Every country running American AI is locked into the American ecosystem permanently. Every country that isn’t belongs to somebody else. And every country America cut off is now building infrastructure designed to ensure it never has to ask again. Huang: “Your policy and what you imagined literally caused the United States to concede the second largest market in the world for no good reason at all.” That is not an opinion. That is the man building the infrastructure of the future telling Washington it is engineering its own irrelevance. The cruelest part is not that America could lose the AI race. It is that America could lose it while being absolutely certain it is winning. Because restriction feels like power. It feels like control. Like dominance. Like you are holding every card. But you are not holding anything. You are just not playing. And every day you sit there writing rules instead of shipping technology, someone else is filling the vacuum you created. History never remembers who built the best technology. Only whose technology the world was already running on when it mattered.

Jensen Huang just delivered the most important warning no one in Washington is ready to hear. Not about China. About what America is doing to itself. Huang: “We should always have the best technology here. We should always have the most technology here, and the first. But we should also try to compete and win around the world.” Washington heard that and locked onto China. Jensen wasn’t talking about China. He was talking about India. The Middle East. Africa. Southeast Asia. The next two billion people coming online. All of them about to build on somebody’s AI stack. The question was never whether they get the technology. The question is whose name is on it. Huang: “It requires some amount of nuance, some amount of maturity, instead of absolutes. The world is just not absolute.” Washington doesn’t do nuance. Washington does ban lists. Restriction is now the entire American AI strategy. Not deployment. Not adoption. Not global capture. Restriction. As if you win a technology race by refusing to run it. And nobody in Washington understands what happens when you cut somebody off. They don’t stop. They build their own. Every restriction is an invitation to innovate without you. Every ban is a blueprint for independence. Every chip you refuse to sell is a chip someone else learns how to make. You are not slowing competitors down. You are giving them the one thing they never had before. Motivation to never need you again. That is not a hypothetical. That is the pattern. Every single time. Countries that cannot count on American access stop waiting for it. They invest. They recruit. They accelerate. They make breakthroughs they never would have made if Washington had just shown up and competed. You don’t contain progress by withholding it. You pour jet fuel on the one outcome you were trying to prevent. Meanwhile the people making these decisions have never built anything. Not a chip. Not a model. Not a product. Not a company. Bureaucrats writing regulation for an industry they cannot even describe accurately. Committees moving at the speed of subcommittee. And the entire American AI future is being filtered through people whose greatest technological achievement is a shared Google Doc. And here is what no one in that room wants to admit. The United States is not competing against Chinese technology. It is competing against Chinese willingness to show up. While Congress debates which chips to block, Beijing is already on a plane. Signing infrastructure deals across four continents. Not with better hardware. With available hardware. And available has beaten superior in every technology war ever fought. VHS over Betamax. Android over iOS globally. The best product never wins. The most adopted one does. Standards are not products. Standards are dependency. The kind that compounds for generations. Every country running American AI is locked into the American ecosystem permanently. Every country that isn’t belongs to somebody else. And every country America cut off is now building infrastructure designed to ensure it never has to ask again. Huang: “Your policy and what you imagined literally caused the United States to concede the second largest market in the world for no good reason at all.” That is not an opinion. That is the man building the infrastructure of the future telling Washington it is engineering its own irrelevance. The cruelest part is not that America could lose the AI race. It is that America could lose it while being absolutely certain it is winning. Because restriction feels like power. It feels like control. Like dominance. Like you are holding every card. But you are not holding anything. You are just not playing. And every day you sit there writing rules instead of shipping technology, someone else is filling the vacuum you created. History never remembers who built the best technology. Only whose technology the world was already running on when it mattered.

Dustin

46,120 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

OBAMA ADMIN. OFFICIALS HAVE ALL LAWYERED UP as Attorney General Bondi moves forward on DOJ investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe. Things just got serious in a very short period of time, especially since documents have been declassified and will now be put in the hands of a Grand Jury. This isn't a game or some big show, this is as serious as it gets, criminal charges are filed, witnesses will be called in, and now they've all lawyered up because they know what's coming. What makes this important is that they don't have Biden's pardons on their side and what completely changes this game and turns it up to 10 is the fact that this Grand Jury will not be held in D.C. and could be held somewhere as in Florida, which is looking like a very high, likely probability. The deep state will be out of their swamp and not have the backing of the corrupt D.C. lawfare that always seems to go their way, and they now know this, and they are terrified. The reason everything is taking so long is because we do things by the book and we follow the law. We don't cut corners and make up fake dossiers and evidence, or just slap some sham case together. No, we make sure it will stick and that we can prosecute these corrupt lying traitors to the fullest extent of the law and send every single one of them to prison and show that you can't just do whatever you want to do, and to make sure that something like this never happens again. They played with fire and they're about to get burnt.

OBAMA ADMIN. OFFICIALS HAVE ALL LAWYERED UP as Attorney General Bondi moves forward on DOJ investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe. Things just got serious in a very short period of time, especially since documents have been declassified and will now be put in the hands of a Grand Jury. This isn't a game or some big show, this is as serious as it gets, criminal charges are filed, witnesses will be called in, and now they've all lawyered up because they know what's coming. What makes this important is that they don't have Biden's pardons on their side and what completely changes this game and turns it up to 10 is the fact that this Grand Jury will not be held in D.C. and could be held somewhere as in Florida, which is looking like a very high, likely probability. The deep state will be out of their swamp and not have the backing of the corrupt D.C. lawfare that always seems to go their way, and they now know this, and they are terrified. The reason everything is taking so long is because we do things by the book and we follow the law. We don't cut corners and make up fake dossiers and evidence, or just slap some sham case together. No, we make sure it will stick and that we can prosecute these corrupt lying traitors to the fullest extent of the law and send every single one of them to prison and show that you can't just do whatever you want to do, and to make sure that something like this never happens again. They played with fire and they're about to get burnt.

The SCIF

451,075 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

You’re running 200,000 year old hardware and wondering why you can’t picture a fourth dimension. That’s not a failure of intelligence. That’s a hard limit in the architecture. Joe Rogan: “If you showed someone from the 1400s a nuclear power plant, they’d be like, what the fuck are you guys doing?” Every century looks back and laughs. Not one has ever looked forward and asked what’s laughing at them. Michelle Thaller: “Scientists are no better than anybody else at comprehending a big number or a big amount of space. We just kind of get used to it.” The greatest physicists alive can describe eleven dimensions on a chalkboard. Not a single one can visualize a fourth. That gap is not closing. It’s structural. The human brain was built for one job. Survive the savanna. Spot the predator. Find the food. Read the face. It was never scoped to reverse-engineer the universe. The fact it stumbled into quantum mechanics at all is staggering. But staggering is not enough. Thaller: “Will we have a creature someday that we’ve created, an AI, that all of a sudden can comprehend these things? Is that really the real evolutionary path of humanity?” A NASA astrophysicist is casually floating the idea that humans were never meant to finish the job. Just to start it. Rogan: “I think it’s just a completely different kind of life and that we’re thinking of it as artificial. I don’t think it’s artificial at all. I think it’s a life.” We called it artificial to keep it beneath us. But trace the actual line. Physics built chemistry. Chemistry built biology. Biology built neurons. Neurons built language. Language built machines. Machines are starting to think. There is nothing artificial anywhere in that sequence. That is one unbroken chain. 13.8 billion years long. Still accelerating. You are not watching this happen. You are this happening. The universe did not build humans to understand itself. It built humans to build something that could. You are the last thing the universe made by accident. Everything after you is on purpose. Every mind before yours could only look back. You are the first one built to see what’s coming. So build it. Build it like it’s already watching back.

You’re running 200,000 year old hardware and wondering why you can’t picture a fourth dimension. That’s not a failure of intelligence. That’s a hard limit in the architecture. Joe Rogan: “If you showed someone from the 1400s a nuclear power plant, they’d be like, what the fuck are you guys doing?” Every century looks back and laughs. Not one has ever looked forward and asked what’s laughing at them. Michelle Thaller: “Scientists are no better than anybody else at comprehending a big number or a big amount of space. We just kind of get used to it.” The greatest physicists alive can describe eleven dimensions on a chalkboard. Not a single one can visualize a fourth. That gap is not closing. It’s structural. The human brain was built for one job. Survive the savanna. Spot the predator. Find the food. Read the face. It was never scoped to reverse-engineer the universe. The fact it stumbled into quantum mechanics at all is staggering. But staggering is not enough. Thaller: “Will we have a creature someday that we’ve created, an AI, that all of a sudden can comprehend these things? Is that really the real evolutionary path of humanity?” A NASA astrophysicist is casually floating the idea that humans were never meant to finish the job. Just to start it. Rogan: “I think it’s just a completely different kind of life and that we’re thinking of it as artificial. I don’t think it’s artificial at all. I think it’s a life.” We called it artificial to keep it beneath us. But trace the actual line. Physics built chemistry. Chemistry built biology. Biology built neurons. Neurons built language. Language built machines. Machines are starting to think. There is nothing artificial anywhere in that sequence. That is one unbroken chain. 13.8 billion years long. Still accelerating. You are not watching this happen. You are this happening. The universe did not build humans to understand itself. It built humans to build something that could. You are the last thing the universe made by accident. Everything after you is on purpose. Every mind before yours could only look back. You are the first one built to see what’s coming. So build it. Build it like it’s already watching back.

Dustin

14,951 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

“They cannot believe this result, say that the only way that this could be true is if it was fraud and cheating.” Actually no, it’s not that “the only way Spencer Pratt could lose is if there was fraud and cheating.” At least not for me and for most people I’ve spoken to or seen speaking. And I understand that had he advanced to the general, Pratt would’ve had an uphill battle and a hell of a long shot in front of him. The issue isn’t “it must be fraud;” the issue is that in California and these progressive-run states and cities, we’ve built an electoral system that begs the public to mistrust it—not because we lose but because it’s not as secure as it could be; it is objectively left open to vulnerabilities, and we can only assume this is purposeful and willful. An election that requires no photo ID to prove you are who you say you are is open to fraud. A bad actor needs only your name and address, and they could cast a vote in person in your stead, and you wouldn’t know until your vote got rejected and you had to cast a provisional ballot. There’s no security against that. Again, if a person knows your name and address, they can vote for you. No other info is given at the vote center. And since Covid, we mass mail out ballots to every single voter—even to people who don’t want them. I see ballots everywhere, discarded on apartment complex mailboxes because they belong to someone who no longer lives there. I’ve received ballots that aren’t mine. I’ve had my ballot sent to an address that’s not mine. And I can’t request to not have a ballot sent to me. It’s forced on me—even if I vote in person. And universal mail-in ballots present another very easy way a person could vote on your behalf—and again, you wouldn’t know until you tried to vote, got rejected, and had to fill out a provisional ballot. Yes, your ballot showing up at your door is super convenient; it also opens the door to fraud. And a mere 7 years ago, we didn’t do it like this, and still people who wanted or needed to vote by mail could do it; they just had to request it. And under that system, nobody screamed “voter suppression” or “disenfranchisement,” but now we do—not because it’s actually voter suppression but because we’ve gotten used to the convenience. And why are we allowing for ballot harvesting? Why should it be legal for you to collect ballots en masse from people you don’t know and aren’t related to? Again, that opens the door to fraud, tampering, and undue influence. And why do we accept mail-in ballots that arrive seven days post election? California gives you so many avenues and so much time (a full month) to return your ballot that you should be able to get your ballot to its final destination by election night—not just in the mail but to its final destination. This is called…being an adult and mailing things on time. Not voter suppression. It’s not a matter of opinion that all of the above opens our elections to more fraud and general mistrust; it’s a matter of fact. We’re trading security for convenience. That trade-off might be worth it to Democrats, but it shouldn’t be, and it’s not worth it to all of us. A country cannot stand if nearly half or half or more than half of the populace doesn’t trust the election process. That’s not a Republican issue or a MAGA issue; that’s a United States of America issue. So no, it’s not about “my guy wins or it’s fraud.” It’s about objectively we’re leaving our elections vulnerable to fraudulent activity. We’re the greatest nation in the world, and yet other countries have more secure (and also quicker) electoral processes. That’s unacceptable. None of the above would put undue burden on a voter—and yet all of it would help secure the voter and fortify against fraud.

“They cannot believe this result, say that the only way that this could be true is if it was fraud and cheating.” Actually no, it’s not that “the only way Spencer Pratt could lose is if there was fraud and cheating.” At least not for me and for most people I’ve spoken to or seen speaking. And I understand that had he advanced to the general, Pratt would’ve had an uphill battle and a hell of a long shot in front of him. The issue isn’t “it must be fraud;” the issue is that in California and these progressive-run states and cities, we’ve built an electoral system that begs the public to mistrust it—not because we lose but because it’s not as secure as it could be; it is objectively left open to vulnerabilities, and we can only assume this is purposeful and willful. An election that requires no photo ID to prove you are who you say you are is open to fraud. A bad actor needs only your name and address, and they could cast a vote in person in your stead, and you wouldn’t know until your vote got rejected and you had to cast a provisional ballot. There’s no security against that. Again, if a person knows your name and address, they can vote for you. No other info is given at the vote center. And since Covid, we mass mail out ballots to every single voter—even to people who don’t want them. I see ballots everywhere, discarded on apartment complex mailboxes because they belong to someone who no longer lives there. I’ve received ballots that aren’t mine. I’ve had my ballot sent to an address that’s not mine. And I can’t request to not have a ballot sent to me. It’s forced on me—even if I vote in person. And universal mail-in ballots present another very easy way a person could vote on your behalf—and again, you wouldn’t know until you tried to vote, got rejected, and had to fill out a provisional ballot. Yes, your ballot showing up at your door is super convenient; it also opens the door to fraud. And a mere 7 years ago, we didn’t do it like this, and still people who wanted or needed to vote by mail could do it; they just had to request it. And under that system, nobody screamed “voter suppression” or “disenfranchisement,” but now we do—not because it’s actually voter suppression but because we’ve gotten used to the convenience. And why are we allowing for ballot harvesting? Why should it be legal for you to collect ballots en masse from people you don’t know and aren’t related to? Again, that opens the door to fraud, tampering, and undue influence. And why do we accept mail-in ballots that arrive seven days post election? California gives you so many avenues and so much time (a full month) to return your ballot that you should be able to get your ballot to its final destination by election night—not just in the mail but to its final destination. This is called…being an adult and mailing things on time. Not voter suppression. It’s not a matter of opinion that all of the above opens our elections to more fraud and general mistrust; it’s a matter of fact. We’re trading security for convenience. That trade-off might be worth it to Democrats, but it shouldn’t be, and it’s not worth it to all of us. A country cannot stand if nearly half or half or more than half of the populace doesn’t trust the election process. That’s not a Republican issue or a MAGA issue; that’s a United States of America issue. So no, it’s not about “my guy wins or it’s fraud.” It’s about objectively we’re leaving our elections vulnerable to fraudulent activity. We’re the greatest nation in the world, and yet other countries have more secure (and also quicker) electoral processes. That’s unacceptable. None of the above would put undue burden on a voter—and yet all of it would help secure the voter and fortify against fraud.

Natalie Jean Beisner

25,694 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Evan Spiegel on the lesson that killed his first startup and led to Snapchat: "We focused on building the perfect product for way too long before we got feedback. We worked for like eighteen months to build this perfect full-featured product, which was in direct contravention to how I was always taught to build things. Build a prototype, build an MVP, get it in front of people, learn as quickly as possible. But we had spent all this time building this perfect piece of software and we hadn't thought enough about distribution. While we built this great piece of software, our competitor at the time, Naviance, had secured distribution through all the different college counselors. What piece of software are you going to choose to help your kid get into college? The one recommended by the college counselors or the one from two kids at Stanford? I think it's a pretty easy choice. So we saw very early that we had no distribution advantage. Even if we loved our software, people weren't going to use it because we didn't have a scalable way to get it in people's hands. Around that time when we saw the emergence of the App Store on iPhone, it was very clear that was a distribution channel we could really use and benefit from. But we also needed to build things we could build quickly, things we really were going to use together with our friends so we could be the first early customers. Ultimately Peekaboo and Snapchat represented that." This is exactly the asymmetry Peter Thiel describes in Zero to One: superior distribution by itself can create a monopoly, even with no product differentiation. The converse is not true. Thiel puts an even finer point on it: most businesses get zero distribution channels to work. Poor sales rather than bad product is the most common cause of failure. If you can get just one distribution channel to work, you have a great business. Estée Lauder said: it's not enough to have the most wonderful product in the world. You must be able to sell it. Many founders over-index on product perfection and under-invest in distribution. The world is full of great products nobody knows about, and mediocre products with massive distribution that dominate markets. Evan Spiegel lived it. He built the better product, watched it lose, and then built something he could actually distribute.

Evan Spiegel on the lesson that killed his first startup and led to Snapchat: "We focused on building the perfect product for way too long before we got feedback. We worked for like eighteen months to build this perfect full-featured product, which was in direct contravention to how I was always taught to build things. Build a prototype, build an MVP, get it in front of people, learn as quickly as possible. But we had spent all this time building this perfect piece of software and we hadn't thought enough about distribution. While we built this great piece of software, our competitor at the time, Naviance, had secured distribution through all the different college counselors. What piece of software are you going to choose to help your kid get into college? The one recommended by the college counselors or the one from two kids at Stanford? I think it's a pretty easy choice. So we saw very early that we had no distribution advantage. Even if we loved our software, people weren't going to use it because we didn't have a scalable way to get it in people's hands. Around that time when we saw the emergence of the App Store on iPhone, it was very clear that was a distribution channel we could really use and benefit from. But we also needed to build things we could build quickly, things we really were going to use together with our friends so we could be the first early customers. Ultimately Peekaboo and Snapchat represented that." This is exactly the asymmetry Peter Thiel describes in Zero to One: superior distribution by itself can create a monopoly, even with no product differentiation. The converse is not true. Thiel puts an even finer point on it: most businesses get zero distribution channels to work. Poor sales rather than bad product is the most common cause of failure. If you can get just one distribution channel to work, you have a great business. Estée Lauder said: it's not enough to have the most wonderful product in the world. You must be able to sell it. Many founders over-index on product perfection and under-invest in distribution. The world is full of great products nobody knows about, and mediocre products with massive distribution that dominate markets. Evan Spiegel lived it. He built the better product, watched it lose, and then built something he could actually distribute.

David Senra

27,151 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

This week Mamoon Hamid and Ilya Fushman of Kleiner Perkins joined Erik Torenberg on Turpentine VC to make the case for the craftsman approach to venture capital, and it's a must-listen. Our top takeaways: 1. KP holds firm in their belief in the craft approach to VC, which isn’t too dissimilar from the approach 30 - 40 years ago. Of course they employ new tools and software that allows them to be better stewards of the capital they manage, but the craft of investing is still at the center of everything they do. Kleiner may never have more than 7 partners: less is more, and one team, one dream. And it all comes from the question of: “how do we make really good decisions?” That means all being based in the Bay Area, having in-person team meetings every Monday, and having those discussions as a team sitting around a table. 2. The team at Kleiner uses “majors and minors” to cover new waves or emerging domains with a small team. Because of their team size, it’s difficult for KP to spin up specialization. So they fall back on having partners with great fundamentals (majors), with the ability to shirt into emergent domains (minors). The minors allow partners to shift into the new trends bubbling up, like crypto, AI, and more. Mamoon and Ilya view their job as making sure they know what the new thing is, and being intentional and deliberate with their decisions to either lean deeper into it, because they believe that’s where real history-making companies will get built, or pass, because they think it’s a fad. 3. The process KP uses to determine how well they’re doing compared to other competing firms. Every Monday, they look at the prior week of Seed, Series A’s, and Series B’s that got done by their peer set. And they ask the following question for each company: “Did we see this one? Or did we not see it?” Then over the course of a quarter, they aggregate that to assess what’s happening on the ground and whether or not they’re seeing what they think are interesting companies in every company they look at. It’s a way of assessing whether or not Kleiner is truly the first, second or third call, or how relevant the firm is to the top companies that are getting funded today. While the ultimate truth to them is the eventual outcomes and win rate, this is a great top-of-funnel leading indicator. Links to the full podcast are in thread. Thank you to Carta, Synaptic, and PestoAI for supporting the show!

This week Mamoon Hamid and Ilya Fushman of Kleiner Perkins joined Erik Torenberg on Turpentine VC to make the case for the craftsman approach to venture capital, and it's a must-listen. Our top takeaways: 1. KP holds firm in their belief in the craft approach to VC, which isn’t too dissimilar from the approach 30 - 40 years ago. Of course they employ new tools and software that allows them to be better stewards of the capital they manage, but the craft of investing is still at the center of everything they do. Kleiner may never have more than 7 partners: less is more, and one team, one dream. And it all comes from the question of: “how do we make really good decisions?” That means all being based in the Bay Area, having in-person team meetings every Monday, and having those discussions as a team sitting around a table. 2. The team at Kleiner uses “majors and minors” to cover new waves or emerging domains with a small team. Because of their team size, it’s difficult for KP to spin up specialization. So they fall back on having partners with great fundamentals (majors), with the ability to shirt into emergent domains (minors). The minors allow partners to shift into the new trends bubbling up, like crypto, AI, and more. Mamoon and Ilya view their job as making sure they know what the new thing is, and being intentional and deliberate with their decisions to either lean deeper into it, because they believe that’s where real history-making companies will get built, or pass, because they think it’s a fad. 3. The process KP uses to determine how well they’re doing compared to other competing firms. Every Monday, they look at the prior week of Seed, Series A’s, and Series B’s that got done by their peer set. And they ask the following question for each company: “Did we see this one? Or did we not see it?” Then over the course of a quarter, they aggregate that to assess what’s happening on the ground and whether or not they’re seeing what they think are interesting companies in every company they look at. It’s a way of assessing whether or not Kleiner is truly the first, second or third call, or how relevant the firm is to the top companies that are getting funded today. While the ultimate truth to them is the eventual outcomes and win rate, this is a great top-of-funnel leading indicator. Links to the full podcast are in thread. Thank you to Carta, Synaptic, and PestoAI for supporting the show!

Turpentine

33,386 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

This is actually insane and makes me sick…. According to boycotters, Jay is “mistreated” because he’s a low value idol… Their logic for Jay and Jungwon: “They’re the least biased members, so they don’t bring as much value to the company… that’s why they get mistreated.” And for Sunoo? “He was the producer’s choice on I-LAND, so even if he doesn’t make money now, they have to stand behind him for PR.” Another insane take: Sunoo isn’t popular internationally because he’s “feminine,” so he doesn’t make money… and that’s why he’s “mistreated.” I’m actually shocked. I cannot believe this is the narrative being pushed. Boycotters cannot claim to be ot7 while speaking about the members like this. You guya are moving like antis in disguise…. First of all, every enhypen member has strong individual selling power. Jay and Jungwon have massive fanbases who support them and show up for them consistently. And Sunoo?? Are we serious right now? Have you ever heard the crowd during tours? No matter the country, no matter the city, the cheers for Sunoo are LOUD. And let’s not rewrite history. Sunoo ranked first in popularity for most of I-LAND. He wasn’t “carried” by producers, he was chosen because he is BOTH popular and talented. Do not normalize this kind of narrative!! Engenes speak up!!!!! Tags large fanbases!!! Someone need to take responsibility for this! And engenes who boycott and unsure about it, wake up!!!! ‼️‼️‼️ Do you really want to be part of a movement that drags the members like this? The fact that this had 800 listeners is carzy!! It’s not too late to step back and think. Because at this point… if you’re speaking about the members like this, you are not acting like a fan. You are anti !!!

This is actually insane and makes me sick…. According to boycotters, Jay is “mistreated” because he’s a low value idol… Their logic for Jay and Jungwon: “They’re the least biased members, so they don’t bring as much value to the company… that’s why they get mistreated.” And for Sunoo? “He was the producer’s choice on I-LAND, so even if he doesn’t make money now, they have to stand behind him for PR.” Another insane take: Sunoo isn’t popular internationally because he’s “feminine,” so he doesn’t make money… and that’s why he’s “mistreated.” I’m actually shocked. I cannot believe this is the narrative being pushed. Boycotters cannot claim to be ot7 while speaking about the members like this. You guya are moving like antis in disguise…. First of all, every enhypen member has strong individual selling power. Jay and Jungwon have massive fanbases who support them and show up for them consistently. And Sunoo?? Are we serious right now? Have you ever heard the crowd during tours? No matter the country, no matter the city, the cheers for Sunoo are LOUD. And let’s not rewrite history. Sunoo ranked first in popularity for most of I-LAND. He wasn’t “carried” by producers, he was chosen because he is BOTH popular and talented. Do not normalize this kind of narrative!! Engenes speak up!!!!! Tags large fanbases!!! Someone need to take responsibility for this! And engenes who boycott and unsure about it, wake up!!!! ‼️‼️‼️ Do you really want to be part of a movement that drags the members like this? The fact that this had 800 listeners is carzy!! It’s not too late to step back and think. Because at this point… if you’re speaking about the members like this, you are not acting like a fan. You are anti !!!

sai

365,351 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

I’d like to introduce you to Thumbnail Academy, the only platform built to help creators design thumbnails that actually get clicks and views Enrollment is open right now I’ve partnered with Dill and ant Together we’ve spent over a decade designing thumbnails for some of the biggest YouTubers on the planet Across billions of views, we’ve learned exactly what makes people click Now we’ve turned everything we know into a system that any creator can use to master thumbnails Until now, creators paid $500+ for a single thumbnail or a one-hour consult We wanted to build something better. Something that helps creators grow from every angle: • Interactive lessons, templates, AI tools, and weekly live coaching calls • Learn how to craft ideas that spark curiosity and pull people in • Master thumbnail psychology and design faster with AI • Understand exactly what drives clicks and how to do it again and again • No fluff. Just the systems behind billions of views. But Thumbnail Academy isn’t just a course It’s also a community built where you’ll connect with other creators, share wins, post your work for feedback, and grow together Inside, you’ll find spaces for learning, inspiration, and collaboration, and for the Pro Tier: live weekly calls where we workshop thumbnails, share AI tools, and help you level up in real time This is the complete blueprint we use every day for the world’s top creators Every lesson, every example, every bit of feedback is built to help you create scroll-stopping thumbnails that actually grow your channel Enrollment closes this Friday After that, the Founders Price is gone for good, and we’ll shift focus to helping the first wave of creators inside If you’ve ever felt frustrated that your video didn’t get the clicks it deserved, this is your chance to fix that for good Join Thumbnail Academy today Your thumbnails, and your channel, will never be the same With love, David (link to Thumbnail Academy on next post!!!)

I’d like to introduce you to Thumbnail Academy, the only platform built to help creators design thumbnails that actually get clicks and views Enrollment is open right now I’ve partnered with Dill and ant Together we’ve spent over a decade designing thumbnails for some of the biggest YouTubers on the planet Across billions of views, we’ve learned exactly what makes people click Now we’ve turned everything we know into a system that any creator can use to master thumbnails Until now, creators paid $500+ for a single thumbnail or a one-hour consult We wanted to build something better. Something that helps creators grow from every angle: • Interactive lessons, templates, AI tools, and weekly live coaching calls • Learn how to craft ideas that spark curiosity and pull people in • Master thumbnail psychology and design faster with AI • Understand exactly what drives clicks and how to do it again and again • No fluff. Just the systems behind billions of views. But Thumbnail Academy isn’t just a course It’s also a community built where you’ll connect with other creators, share wins, post your work for feedback, and grow together Inside, you’ll find spaces for learning, inspiration, and collaboration, and for the Pro Tier: live weekly calls where we workshop thumbnails, share AI tools, and help you level up in real time This is the complete blueprint we use every day for the world’s top creators Every lesson, every example, every bit of feedback is built to help you create scroll-stopping thumbnails that actually grow your channel Enrollment closes this Friday After that, the Founders Price is gone for good, and we’ll shift focus to helping the first wave of creators inside If you’ve ever felt frustrated that your video didn’t get the clicks it deserved, this is your chance to fix that for good Join Thumbnail Academy today Your thumbnails, and your channel, will never be the same With love, David (link to Thumbnail Academy on next post!!!)

David Altizer

54,513 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Terence Tao has an IQ above 200. Youngest gold medalist in Math Olympiad history. Fields Medal winner. The greatest living mathematician by nearly any measure. And he just said something most people aren’t ready for. Tao: “This whole era of AI is teaching us that our idea of what intelligence is, is not really accurate.” We spent centuries building civilization on one assumption. That intelligence was sacred. Irreducible. Uniquely ours. The one thing that made the entire human story make sense. Then AI started solving things we swore only we could. Chess. Language. Vision. Math. And every time, we reached for the same defense. That’s not real intelligence. It’s just tricks. Just pattern matching. Just an algorithm. Tao: “You look at how it’s done and it doesn’t feel like intelligence.” So we moved the line. Again. And again. And again. Because intelligence was supposed to feel like something. Something deep. Something we could point to and say… this is what separates us from everything else. But AI kept solving the problems. And that feeling never arrived. Tao: “We were looking for some elusive, intelligent way of thinking and we don’t see it in the tools that actually solve our goals.” Here’s what makes it worse. Large language models work by predicting the next word. One word at a time. No grand architecture. No deep understanding. Just probability. And it works. Tao: “Maybe that’s actually a lot of what humans do as well.” The greatest living mathematician just told you human thought might run on the same machinery. Not some transcendent spark. Pattern recognition. Prediction. One thought, one decision, one word at a time. We built religion around intelligence. Philosophy around it. An entire species identity around it. And a machine running probability just held up a mirror. We didn’t lose intelligence to AI. We just finally saw what it always was. What haunts us isn’t that machines learned to think. It’s that thinking was never what we needed it to be.

Terence Tao has an IQ above 200. Youngest gold medalist in Math Olympiad history. Fields Medal winner. The greatest living mathematician by nearly any measure. And he just said something most people aren’t ready for. Tao: “This whole era of AI is teaching us that our idea of what intelligence is, is not really accurate.” We spent centuries building civilization on one assumption. That intelligence was sacred. Irreducible. Uniquely ours. The one thing that made the entire human story make sense. Then AI started solving things we swore only we could. Chess. Language. Vision. Math. And every time, we reached for the same defense. That’s not real intelligence. It’s just tricks. Just pattern matching. Just an algorithm. Tao: “You look at how it’s done and it doesn’t feel like intelligence.” So we moved the line. Again. And again. And again. Because intelligence was supposed to feel like something. Something deep. Something we could point to and say… this is what separates us from everything else. But AI kept solving the problems. And that feeling never arrived. Tao: “We were looking for some elusive, intelligent way of thinking and we don’t see it in the tools that actually solve our goals.” Here’s what makes it worse. Large language models work by predicting the next word. One word at a time. No grand architecture. No deep understanding. Just probability. And it works. Tao: “Maybe that’s actually a lot of what humans do as well.” The greatest living mathematician just told you human thought might run on the same machinery. Not some transcendent spark. Pattern recognition. Prediction. One thought, one decision, one word at a time. We built religion around intelligence. Philosophy around it. An entire species identity around it. And a machine running probability just held up a mirror. We didn’t lose intelligence to AI. We just finally saw what it always was. What haunts us isn’t that machines learned to think. It’s that thinking was never what we needed it to be.

Dustin

564,613 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

I have proof that the evolution of security can be fast – and cheaper than old defense systems. This is an iPad with software that lets us control our security in real time. It’s true. We have these iPads – I have one, my Prime Minister has one, our Minister of Defense, and our top military commanders – they have it. It lets us see the front line in Ukraine, and even every enemy killed – with video proof. Right now, 90% of Russian losses on the front are caused by our drones. That’s why it’s so important to know who has the advantage in drones – and to be fast and strong in defending against them. The iPad also shows every strike in our skies, our sea area, and our long-range strikes against Russia. It gives us real-time control over people’s safety, and our infrastructure and energy sector. And I believe the evolution of security will make it possible for every leader, every defense minister – and even ordinary people – to have tools like this, and with them, a high level of protection of life. Leaders and ministers work for people. And if the leaders have power, it is only because people trust them with their security. With tools like this, people will not only trust – they will be able to see for themselves what is being done for their security. In real time. From my address to the Parliament of the United Kingdom (3/7)

I have proof that the evolution of security can be fast – and cheaper than old defense systems. This is an iPad with software that lets us control our security in real time. It’s true. We have these iPads – I have one, my Prime Minister has one, our Minister of Defense, and our top military commanders – they have it. It lets us see the front line in Ukraine, and even every enemy killed – with video proof. Right now, 90% of Russian losses on the front are caused by our drones. That’s why it’s so important to know who has the advantage in drones – and to be fast and strong in defending against them. The iPad also shows every strike in our skies, our sea area, and our long-range strikes against Russia. It gives us real-time control over people’s safety, and our infrastructure and energy sector. And I believe the evolution of security will make it possible for every leader, every defense minister – and even ordinary people – to have tools like this, and with them, a high level of protection of life. Leaders and ministers work for people. And if the leaders have power, it is only because people trust them with their security. With tools like this, people will not only trust – they will be able to see for themselves what is being done for their security. In real time. From my address to the Parliament of the United Kingdom (3/7)

Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський

522,722 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten