Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

**PAID** #VOICEOVER CASTING CALL (4M) $125/episode - Main Characters $2.50/line - Supporting Characters DEADLINE: 11:59 PM on Sunday, 03/26/2024 AniMedia Entertainment | Anime Audio Dramas (a @gmbjapan company) and レッド・エンタテインメント公式 partner up to produce the English dub for audio-drama #ShareLove. Audition Doc VA Casting Call RT

29,213 просмотров • 2 лет назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 10

Фото профиля Chloë Elmore Voice Actor
Chloë Elmore Voice Actor2 лет назад

@AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info Oooo if I was a man, I'd jump at it! Audio dramas are such a vibe!!

Фото профиля Vanille Velasquez
Vanille Velasquez2 лет назад

Hi Mike! Not sure if this is just a me problem but I can't seem to open the link for the audition doc. Is there an alternative link by any chance?

Фото профиля Mike Ciporkin
Mike Ciporkin2 лет назад

Should be working… I just tried it. Try this?

Фото профиля 🎃 Logan Raposo//Loganraposo on 🦋☁️ 🎃
🎃 Logan Raposo//Loganraposo on 🦋☁️ 🎃2 лет назад

@AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info oh I will absolutely be submitting!

Фото профиля EdwardSabaVO
EdwardSabaVO2 лет назад

@AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info I am so auditioning!

Фото профиля The Giant V.O.tter resistance.
The Giant V.O.tter resistance.2 лет назад

@AdventureNoises @AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info @BlxssomVA @GoldieChan @FalonEcho @Ladyaema_ @LottieABourne @FaelwenStar @ZaPanda_VA @Sharki_V @starbx93 @xiosora @ScazzaScarlett @Shelly_Kitten_ @EliseMeggie @Everlasting_Fae @FauxSynderVA @MysticWaterzYT @marlaroseVA @OratrixVO @Audiblyyours

Фото профиля M. Jack
M. Jack2 лет назад

@AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info Thanks for the opportunity Mike! Good luck with casting!

Фото профиля Colin Ashworth
Colin Ashworth2 лет назад

@AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info Looks very interesting, will send an audition out soon!

Фото профиля T. Daniel Morris
T. Daniel Morris2 лет назад

@AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info Say less! I definitely will send a submission asap!

Фото профиля The Giant V.O.tter resistance.
The Giant V.O.tter resistance.2 лет назад

@AdventureNoises @AniMediaEnt @gmbjapan @RED_Ent_info @SuperNovaVO @KateFarrellVA @VAMichaelaLaws @zoeytruran @Zrajab95 @DaylenZenGen @Animation_Voice @ArdentValkyrie @AndreCanada_Vo @BPJeffords @bejarana @Cinderkin @ClayCannonVO @DrewCampbellVO @Daniel_MurphyVA @damatchava @geebmachine @Jake_Vox @kendillonvo

Похожие видео

🚨WATCH: The full Ron Baron call on SpaceX, recorded June 2 with close to 3,000 investors listening in. Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital, is joined by co-president Michael Baron, chief operating officer Pat Patalino and Isai Leven, the firm's lead analyst on the Elon ecosystem. Katya Rosenblatt, global head of distribution, hosts. Notes on this upload: ~ Silent parts removed ~ Audio boosted ~ Playback slightly sped up ~ Timestamps added for easy navigation Timestamps ~ 0:00 Welcome and introductions ~ 1:26 Ron's road from the US patent office to $63 billion, seeded by George Soros ~ 3:36 $20 billion of client profits from Elon companies ~ 5:36 The call: SpaceX worth $10 trillion to $30 trillion within 15 years ~ 6:34 The Dutch East India Company parallel ~ 8:56 What Elon does at midnight in Memphis ~ 12:30 Starlink at 300 million customers, worth $14 trillion alone ~ 16:44 Anthropic renting Colossus compute for $1.25 billion a month ~ 18:10 Musk needs 50x the world's chip supply, so he builds his own ~ 27:11 The $1 billion IPO order ~ 31:28 Key man risk, Musk's security and 3 million job applicants ~ 38:04 Lockups and liquidity with COO Pat Patalino ~ 40:28 Blue Origin, Bezos and China ~ 46:34 What the market is underestimating ~ 54:05 The Soros lesson on owning your best idea ~ 55:30 Mars and the light of consciousness ~ 59:10 "I am 83. I'm not selling my shares in my lifetime." SPCX lists on the Nasdaq June 12. Video posted by Baron Capital

Muskonomy

33,138 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Well, the "Diddy Bellevue House" strikes again. Kids with money, fancy cars, and a mansion for entertaining. No harm, right? Wrong. Bellevue, Washington - your code compliance department is understaffed we understand that, but why are they so lazy? Why are they telling residents this is a police matter? You have a 3–4 million dollar mansion being used for entertainment. They're literally selling tickets. That home and neighborhood is not zoned for this. DO YOUR JOB. This video is audio of all the chatter regarding the house overnight. If it's hard for you to listen to, which is understandable, here's the chatter that was documented. 5/29-5/30 5:37 pm - order violation reported at the party house, caller has a restraining order against his landlord, then said his landlord was driving away in a white Tesla 9:47 pm - disturbance reported at the “Bellevue Diddy House”, 16458 SE 44th Pl, several reports of a party, now landlord is calling in saying they think an argument is going on or a disturbance with intoxicated subjects, at least 50 people on site About 10:10 pm an officer said they needed to get tow trucks due to cars blocking the roadway and can barely get a patrol car through Then they requested 4-5 tow trucks and blocked more cars from arriving A dark colored PT Cruiser ignored an officer's commands multiple times, female drove around the lit-up patrol car, they stopped her further down the road and started doing field sobriety tests, she said she had some warrants too 10:33 pm - announcements made that if they don’t move their cars, they will be impounded 10:38 pm - first tow truck has arrived 10:40 pm - homeowner was walking towards the house and wanted to film what was going on, then they said it was the landlord… it’s still unclear who owns this house They were running plates on lots of vehicles 11:15 pm - sounded like subjects were running from the house and yelling 11:59 pm - a disturbance was reported back at the party house, now a physical fight with a person on the ground, at one point two people were on the ground, 10-15 people near the gate with 4 vehicles parked blocking the roadway, officers were headed back 12:00 am - physical fight has stopped, verbal only 1:26 am - a call came in for a 15-year-old female that snuck into the party house Neighbors reported hearing another fight around 2 am, but that was not on the scanner. Ramy, Von, Nikita, and everyone else... we don't give up. We will continue to dig and investigate if you continue to be a menace to our community. We. Are. Not. The. Ones. #Bellevue #BellevueWA #PartyHouse #NoAccountability #WasteOfResources #ContentHouse #Juveniles #RichKidProblems #Entitled #WeAreWatching #WeDontGiveUp #WeCanPlayThisGameToo

Factoria Looks Like Shiit

12,983 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Here's my first series of Anime created by Generative AI. Vidu 2.0 is a groundbreaking advancement for storytelling in the Anime style. #vidu @Viduforhuman Hi everyone 😊 😉 Here's my first AI-created Anime series. The name of my anime is Kuro & Yuki. I won't spoil the story for you, but it begins with these two boys locked up in what appears to be a highly secure institute/prison. Yuki has reached the age where he has awakened his power. While wandering the corridors of the institute, he meets Kuro, a boy with autism. It's a fleeting encounter as they end up being separated. As the story unfolds, you'll understand who they really are and why they are locked up. I don't plan on making episode 2 yet, even though I've grown attached to my characters' story. I'll continue the story only if a lot of people are interested and want to know what happens next. Otherwise, I'll explore other universes and styles of Anime 😉 Tools: - Epidemic Sound (For sound effects) - Vidu AI (to transform frames into animation) - ElevenLabs (for certain expressions) When I say Vidu 2.0 is a game-changer, I mean it. I had already made my animation with the previous version of Vidu, but when they gave me access to the beta, I urgently changed my plans and recreated all the animations. Let me tell you, it's a whole new level. My first animation was ultra frustrating to bring my ideas to life! Really! And since Vidu couldn't handle many image styles, I clearly couldn't bring my ideas to life. But with Vidu 2.0, I enjoy it much more! For the first time, I really get to bring my ideas to life! Until now, I always had to make compromises. Of course, Vidu is still not perfect, and there are still many obstacles, but it is a truly magnificent advancement! (and it surpasses all the Anime-style AIs I've tested recently) Moreover, Vidu 2.0 is fantastic for special effects, but also for embedding elements into the video (like a hand that appears and interacts with the character, or another character; and the best part is that they perfectly match the style of the original images!) * The animations/images and voices are AI-generated * The SoundDesign is traditional and done by me * The story was entirely written by me (I don't use AI to create my stories, it's important to me to write them myself) The voices were generated thanks to Nijivoice (for secondary characters) and Hailuo Audio (for main characters). I thank Yachimat (yachimat - AI Short Anime) for introducing me to Nijivoice, it's very generous of him! During the beta, we didn't consume credits, otherwise, this animation would have cost me around 20,000 credits, ha ha. Vidu 2.0, with its superb stability and fidelity to the style of images, offers brand new horizons for storytelling! One problem with Vidu 2.0 is that for now, you have to manually extend videos (by exporting the last frame). As you can see, this allowed me to create long scenes with different actions, and everything fits together perfectly! There are still many obstacles to storytelling, such as character consistency (I use the image to video function; I produce my images with Nijijourney) and it's always laborious to have a consistent character! The same goes for backgrounds. Here are the points I've identified that would facilitate storytelling: For Vidu: - Function to extend videos (you can already do this manually by exporting the last frame) - Function to invent the beginning or end of a video using a single frame (you can already do this manually by putting a completely white or completely black image as the first or last frame; this technique also allows you to have very dynamic results with Vidu 2.0! ) - It's difficult to obtain facial expressions for certain image styles (the same image style that the previous version couldn't handle at all). - More dynamism There's always room for improvement, but Vidu 2.0 has truly opened up exciting new possibilities for creative storytelling. ai aiart aianimation aianime ainews anime animenews aitools aitool

Naegiko

67,209 просмотров • 1 год назад

Stargate Trivia: Casting Stargate: Atlantis While SG-1 was my first love (We were together for seven years!), my time on Atlantis proved equally memorable. The show was possessed of a similar tone in its mix of high adventure and humor, yet proved distinct in its exploration of Ancient mythology and an unfamiliar galaxy as seen through the eyes of a new set of heroes. Atlantis offered a sense of wonder and camaraderie born of isolation and constant danger. Whereas team SG-1 could always go home at the conclusion of their adventures, the members of the Atlantis expedition (at least for those first few seasons) could only draw comfort from the city of Atlantis itself – and, of course, each other. It was unique and compelling yet, at the same time, comfortingly familiar. Nowhere is this more evident than in its opening theme, composed by the late Joel Goldsmith, which is, at turns fresh, haunting, stirring and, throughout, discernibly Stargate. Stargate: Atlantis wasn’t envisioned as a companion to Stargate: SG-1. It was intended to replace the long-running series. The only problem was, with eight seasons under its belt, SG-1 wasn’t quite done yet. And fans (and the network) weren’t done with it either. And so, instead of passing the torch and segueing to a new Stargate series, we ended up producing both. In retrospect, it was quite an achievement: 40 hours of television! Today's productions can barely manage a third that output, but Stargates SG-1 and Atlantis delivered two fantastic 40 episode seasons before SG-1 took it’s final bow. It wasn’t easy, but it was certainly made easier by all of the enormously talented individuals who made it happen, from the office staff and crew to the cast and my fellow writer/producers. Still, it was not without its challenges. Take casting, for instance. It may surprise you to know that, when it comes to producing a show, not everybody cares about costumes or set design or whether the script’s fifth act denouement is emotionally satisfying - but everybody, and I do mean EVERYBODY, has an opinion on casting. Studio and network execs, producers, hell, even your significant other peering over your shoulder as you screen the auditions on your home computer, will want to weigh in. Of course, the more voices in the mix the more likely there are to be disagreements. So it is with every production and Atlantis was no different. Different individuals envisioned these characters in very different ways and, as a result, consensus was only achieved after many auditions, calls-backs, heated discussions, and not-so-gentle reminders that our start date was fast-approaching and we really needed someone to say the lines on camera. The part of Carson Beckett was one of the first we cast. The other producers were in Rob’s office, screening the first batch of local auditions when Brad called me in and told me to check out the guy onscreen. I hadn’t imagined Beckett with a Scottish accent but, after watching Paul McGillion in the role, I couldn’t imagine him without one. He’d brought something unexpected to the part, something we all responded to. Elizabeth Weir was not an easy character to pull off. She had to be smart, confident and strong yet needed to exude a certain warmth and empathy we were looking for in the civilian leader of the expedition. When it came time to (re)casting the role, several established names were considered (One had her own hit genre show back in the day while another went on to break out on a hit show soon after), but it was Torri Higginson who managed to strike just the right balance and vault her name to the top of the list. The role of Teyla Emmagan was a tough one to cast. Like Weir, she needed to be a strong, empathetic leader. But she also required something even more important – quite literally, an other-worldly quality that made her unique. Some equally talented actresses auditioned for the role but, as good as they were, they were never quite able to achieve that gravitas Rachel pulled off with such grace and seeming ease. Former VJ Rainbow Sun Francks won the role of Lieutenant Ford on the strength of a great audition, preceded by an equally great audition with a funny hat. I recall Brad Wright on the phone with our casting agent, advising him to ensure there would be no hat worn in the callback for fear the network would fixate on it. There wasn't, they didn't, and Rainbow delivered. The role of John Sheppard was the second to last one cast. It came right down to the wire and there were several candidates in play. The character was originally envisioned as a good ole southern boy, so it only made sense that Ben Browder’s name was bandied about early. However, he was too busy shooting Peacekeeper Wars to warrant consideration. A number of other actors were considered (one went on to play the lead in a hugely popular show the following year while another made his mark as a handsome heart throb on another hugely popular medical series) but it was Joe Flanigan who won the part based on his ability to pull off the devil-may-care attitude Brad and Robert were looking for. We come to the final role cast, a character who, in many ways, embodied everything Atlantis was about: exploration, discovery, fun, humor, and seat-of-your-pants-Holy-Sh&%-how-the-hell-am-I-going-to-get-out-of-this-adventure. And, as I mentioned in a previous post, he almost didn’t make the trip to Pegasus. Originally, the casting call went out for a completely different character, an earnest young doctor who would lend the team much-needed medical support on their off-world ventures. Unfortunately, no one could agree on who that actor should be. If the casting of Sheppard went down to the wire, then the casting of this final role went a step past it. Finally, days away from production, Robert Cooper had an idea: Forget the doctor character. Why not use an established character from SG-1? How about Rodney McKay? The writers were on board, but some executives weren't weren’t sold on the idea. They found him annoying! Hell yeah, but he’d be sooo much fun to write for! Rob got on the phone and went to bat for Rodney, pointing out that the character had come a long way since first being introduced way back in SG-1’s 48 Hours. He’d evolved, going from annoying jerk to endearingly irritating. To this day, I’m convinced that they weren’t totally convinced but, with production poised to commence, they relented, I suppose figuring they could just replace the character somewhere down the line. No one, even those who loved the idea of having the endearingly irritating Rodney McKay on board could have predicted how hugely popular the character would become.

Joseph Mallozzi 🏴‍☠️

28,063 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Stargate Trivia: Casting Stargate: Atlantis While SG-1 was my first love (We were together for seven years!), my time on Atlantis proved equally memorable. The show was possessed of a similar tone in its mix of high adventure and humor, yet proved distinct in its exploration of Ancient mythology and an unfamiliar galaxy as seen through the eyes of a new set of heroes. Atlantis offered a sense of wonder and camaraderie born of isolation and constant danger. Whereas team SG-1 could always go home at the conclusion of their adventures, the members of the Atlantis expedition (at least for those first few seasons) could only draw comfort from the city of Atlantis itself – and, of course, each other. It was unique and compelling yet, at the same time, comfortingly familiar. Nowhere is this more evident than in its opening theme, composed by the late Joel Goldsmith, which is, at turns fresh, haunting, stirring and, throughout, discernibly Stargate. Stargate: Atlantis wasn’t originally planned as a companion to Stargate: SG-1. It was intended to replace the long-running series. The only problem was, with eight seasons under its belt, SG-1 wasn’t quite done yet. And fans (and the network) weren’t done with it either. And so, instead of passing the torch and segueing to a new Stargate series, we ended up producing both. In retrospect, it was quite an achievement: 40 hours of television in a year! Today's productions can barely manage a quarter that output, but Stargates SG-1 and Atlantis delivered two fantastic 40 episode seasons before SG-1 took its final bow. It wasn’t easy, but it was certainly made easier by all of the enormously talented individuals who made it happen, from the office staff and crew to the cast and my fellow writer/producers. Still, it was not without its challenges. Take casting, for instance. It may surprise you to know that, when it comes to producing a show, not everybody cares about costumes or set design or whether the script’s fifth act denouement is emotionally satisfying - but everybody, and I do mean EVERYBODY, has an opinion on casting. Studio and network execs, producers, hell, even your significant other peering over your shoulder as you screen the auditions on your laptop, will want to weigh in. Of course, the more voices in the mix the more likely there are to be disagreements. So it is with every production and Atlantis was no different. Various individuals envisioned these characters in various ways and, as a result, consensus was only achieved after many auditions, calls-backs, heated discussions, and not-so-gentle reminders that our start date was fast-approaching and we really needed someone to say the lines on camera. The part of Carson Beckett was one of the first we cast. The other producers were in Rob’s office, screening the first batch of local auditions when Brad called me in and told me to check out the guy onscreen. I hadn’t imagined Beckett with a Scottish accent but, after watching Paul McGillion (Paul McGillion) in the role, I couldn’t imagine him without one. He’d brought something unexpected to the part, something we all responded to. Elizabeth Weir was not an easy character to pull off. She had to be smart, confident and strong yet needed to exude a certain warmth and empathy we were looking for in the civilian leader of the expedition. When it came time to (re)casting the role, several established names were considered (One had her own hit genre show back in the day while another went on to break out on a hit show soon after), but it was Torri Higginson (torri higginson 🌻 🇺🇦 🕊) who managed to strike just the right balance and vault her name to the top of the list. The role of Teyla Emmagan was a tough one to cast. Like Weir, she needed to be a strong, empathetic leader. But she also required something even more important – quite literally, an other-worldly quality that made her unique. Some equally talented actresses auditioned for the role but, as good as they were, they were never quite able to achieve that gravitas Rachel Luttrell (Rachel Luttrell) pulled off with such grace and seeming ease. Former VJ Rainbow Sun Francks (Rainbow Sun Francks) won the role of Lieutenant Ford on the strength of a great audition, preceded by an equally great audition with a funny hat. I recall Brad Wright on the phone with our casting agent, advising him to ensure there would be no hat worn in the callback for fear the network would fixate on it. There wasn't, they didn't, and Rainbow delivered. The role of John Sheppard was the second to last one cast. It came right down to the wire and there were several candidates in play. The character was originally conceived as a good ole southern boy, so it only made sense that Ben Browder’s name was bandied about early. However, he was too busy shooting Peacekeeper Wars to warrant consideration. A number of other actors were considered (one went on to play the lead in a hugely popular show the following year while another made his mark as a handsome heart throb on another hugely popular medical series) but it was Joe Flanigan (Joe Flanigan) who won the part based on his ability to pull off the devil-may-care attitude Brad and Robert were looking for. We come to the final role cast, a character who, in many ways, embodied everything Atlantis was about: exploration, discovery, fun, humor, and seat-of-your-pants-Holy-Sh&%-how-the-hell-am-I-going-to-get-out-of-this-adventure. And he almost didn’t make the trip to Pegasus. Originally, the casting call went out for a completely different character, an earnest young doctor who would lend the team much-needed medical support on their off-world ventures. Unfortunately, no one could agree on an actor to fill that role. If the casting of Sheppard went down to the wire, then the casting of this final part went a step past it. Finally, days away from production, Robert Cooper had an idea: Forget the doctor character. Why not use an established character from SG-1? How about Rodney McKay played by David Hewlett (David "Stargate Genius Leader" Hewlett)? The writers were on board, but some executives weren't weren’t sold on the idea. They found him annoying! I mean, hell yeah, but he’d be sooo much fun to write for! Rob got on the phone and went to bat for Rodney, pointing out that the character had come a long way since first being introduced way back in SG-1’s 48 Hours. He’d evolved, going from annoying jerk to endearingly irritating. To this day, I’m convinced that they weren’t totally convinced but, with production poised to commence, they relented, I suppose figuring they could just replace the character somewhere down the line. No one, even those who loved the idea of having the endearingly irritating Rodney McKay on board could have predicted how hugely popular the character would become. How do you think we did?

Joseph Mallozzi 🏴‍☠️

61,519 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Video content creation sounds simple, but what if you don’t have time to: • Write the script, • Prepare the visuals, • Generate the voiceover, • Create the subtitles, • And finally render the video? This is why we built Noustiny on top of Nous Research Hermes Agent by adding 12 generic Hermes tools + 13 generic Hermes skills, bringing the whole process into one single flow. How does it work? Let’s take a closer look 👇 ———— 1- Story state: context, tree, motifs: Hermes had no built-in narrative-state primitive for tracking canon, branching story structure, and recurring motifs. So we added three generic Hermes tools for this: → story_tree_graph: Manages the story tree structure. It handles operations like canon path, descendants, and splice insertion points. → narrative_context_builder: Walks the canon chain and returns the live context every narrative skill should reason against. This includes recent chain, mood, and character state. → motif_tracker: Remembers recurring motifs across the story arc. For example, a sword introduced in beat 2 can reappear meaningfully in later scenes. ———— 2- Character / cast pipeline: Hermes had no built-in primitive for cast extraction or character continuity. So we added a four-tool character pipeline: → story_copyright_detector: Handles IP scrubbing. For example, “Iron Man” is converted into an IP-free character description before the image API ever sees it. → character_sheet_builder: Produces 1 to 4 characters. For each character, it creates an IP-free visual description and a hero-portrait prompt. These portraits become the reference frames used across later storyboard scenes. → character_registry_lookup: Finds a character by name inside the cast sheet and attaches the correct portrait reference to each beat. → character_alias_resolver: Resolves aliases like “Mr. Stark” into the main character name. This way, the same character keeps one portrait reference even if they appear under different names. ———— 3- Voice pipeline: Hermes had no built-in primitive for audio acquisition or voice cloning. So we added the full voice chain, and the agent dispatches it autonomously in order: → narration_voice_director: The director-agent reads the seed + story and returns persona_label, search_query, and fallback_query. → voice_sample_builder: Uses yt-dlp + ffmpeg. It accepts a URL, an 11-character ID, or a free-text query. It runs ytsearch5 with dead-video tolerance and normalizes the audio to 24 kHz mono PCM. → voice_clone_synthesize: Wraps ElevenLabs IVC + timestamps. The voice ID is cached by reference SHA. Per-character alignment comes through the same audio call at no extra cost. → voice_clone_cleanup: Frees the cached voice ID after render so orphan voices do not accumulate. ———— 4- Render: Hermes had no built-in video-render entry. So we added the final render tool: → noustiny_storybook: The agent dispatches it as the final step of the chain. One tool call drives the FastAPI render service end to end and emits the mp4. ———— 5- Skills: 13 generic Hermes skills added into skills/creative/: The branching engine in Noustiny works like a council of narrative skills. Each skill is loaded by the gateway as a system prompt and orchestrated in this order: → narrative-brainstorm: Proposes 2 to 3 next-checkpoint options from the canon chain. → narrative-writer-assist: Writes a spliced insert beat that fits the parent and child. → narrative-continuity-critic: Audits downstream beats against the new insert. → narrative-rewriter: Updates the stale beats flagged by the continuity critic. → narrative-judge: Approves or rejects the rewrite against the original flow. → narrative-scene-qa: Checks each beat for consistency, length, and register. → narrative-writer: Finalizes the chosen branch as polished prose. After one splice, this cascade walks downstream by itself until the canon becomes coherent again. ———— 6- Visual + IP pipeline: On the visual side, the goal is not just generating scenes. It is also preserving character continuity and IP safety. This pipeline runs through these skills: → visual-prompt-builder: Turns a beat into an IP-free image prompt and reads the character-sheet references. → scene-composition: Defines shot framing, scene composition, and layout rules. → story-copyright-detector: Skill counterpart of the same-named tool. It can be used for direct slash-command invocation. → character-sheet-builder: Skill counterpart of the same-named tool. Defines cast extraction rules and the IP-free portrait-prompt format used to seed character consistency across the storyboard. → storybook-intro: Generates the cinematic intro page for the render. ———— 7- Voice skill: → narration-voice-director: Defines persona reasoning rules and supports the decision logic behind the same-named voice tool. ———— 8- Pattern: Hermes baseline already had the gateway, agent loop, skill registry, and tool registry. We extended that foundation with 12 generic Hermes tools + 13 generic Hermes skills and organized the system into four main pipelines: • story-state • character continuity • voice • render The important part is this: Noustiny is not a hardcoded system locked inside a single app. A Telegram bot, Discord bot, CLI session, or third-party Next.js app can call the same gateway and use the same tool + skill chains. - No app glue. - No hardcoded prompts. - A drop-in, registry-compatible, agent-native video creation flow. ✅Github:

Ufuk

28,972 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🇦🇺 BONDI BEACH BLOODBATH: WHAT LIT THE FUSE? Netanyahu blamed Australia’s recognition of the State of Palestine Some Arab journalists blamed the war on Gaza Other Israeli journalists pointed at Iran Conspiracy theorists claimed it’s an Israeli false flag attack Today I have former IDF spokesperson Jonathan Conricus and Journalist Michael Tracey to discuss what led to this horrific attack, and what the repercussions could be. Conricus pulls no punches: he wasn't surprised by the attack, seeing it as the grim payoff of "globalize the Intifada" rhetoric and an Aussie government that's "weak and cowardly," quick to bash Israel while letting hate fester. He states examples including chants like "gas the Jews" at Sydney protests right after Oct 7, unpunished synagogue attacks, and Jews told to ditch their kippahs for safety. Tracey fires back: How can the recognition of a Palestinian State be the instigator of this hate, when similar attacks against Jews have been seen in the U.S., a country that has not recognized the state of Palestine. A more plausible reason? The horrific war in Gaza, fueling rage and hate globally. He reminds Conricus of Trump’s many statements warning that the world’s perception of Israel is souring due to the war in Gaza. And those hate speech chants? That’s free speech in action, something every American values in their constitution. This debate cuts to the heart of how foreign policy bleeds into domestic hate, with Australia now a cautionary tale during spiking global antisemitism. Conricus fears more violence without crackdowns; Tracey warns that overreach could backfire on freedoms. Either way, it's a wake-up call for leaders worldwide. 03:10 – "This is what it means when people say globalize the Intifada" 05:01 – Jewish Australians felt “betrayed by legislators, exposed by law enforcement” 08:00 – “Chanting 'gas the Jews' just miles from Bondi Beach” 10:25 – “Not one hate crime suspect brought to justice in Australia” 13:00 – “The line between pro-Palestinian and pro-Hamas is a fake distinction” 16:13 – “Today, Hamas is the dominant Palestinian political organization” 18:11 – “Many protesters were literally paid to be there, on salary” 20:22 – “Islamists want to dominate the West, not integrate into it” 23:03 – Sweden went from open borders to zero immigration — a cautionary tale 25:00 – Muslim hero Ahmed Al-Ahmed saves lives in Bondi shooting 26:22 – “False flag theories? Claims Israel or Iran are behind the attack” 28:08 – “Attackers weren’t trained, could have caused much worse carnage” 30:59 – “Blowback from Gaza campaign is real, even Trump admits it” 33:17 – “Mass propaganda and fake news against Israel fuel lone wolf attacks” 35:45 – “Unarmed Jewish civilians around the world pay the price for incitement”

Mario Nawfal

1,100,486 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Research suggests that up to 40% of cancer cases could be prevented through lifestyle changes. The evidence is now overwhelming: exercise is not just supportive—it’s a therapeutic intervention that recalibrates tumor biology, enhances treatment tolerance, and improves survival outcomes. Today’s interview features Dr. Kerry Courneya. With over 600 peer-reviewed studies, he is one of the most influential figures in exercise oncology. Even if you aren't someone who has personally experienced cancer in one form or another, you need to watch this episode. Episode 99 is Available now on X, YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts. Chapters: 0:00 - Introduction 1:47 - Why exercise should be effortful 2:33 - How to meaningfully reduce risk of cancer 6:22 - What type of exercise is best? 7:59 - How exercise reduces risk—even for smokers and the obese 10:48 - Weekend-only exercise 13:49 - 150 vs. 300 minutes per week (more is better—up to a point) 16:03 - Why pre-diagnosis exercise matters 19:09 - Why resilience to cancer treatment starts with exercise 21:01 - Why low muscle mass drives cancer death 23:58 - Why BMI fails to measure true obesity 27:51 - Why daily activity isn't enough (structured exercise matters) 29:34 - Breaking up sedentary time—do ‘exercise snacks’ help? 31:50 - Supplements vs. exercise 32:32 - Where exercise fits with chemo and immunotherapy 35:30 - Why rest is not the best medicine 41:20 - Aerobic vs. resistance 42:13 - How weight training improves 'chemo completion' 44:41 - Why exercise creates vulnerability in cancer cells (limitations do apply) 47:09 - Why exercise might be crucial for tumor elimination 53:03 - Why cardio may be better at clearing tumor cells 56:18 - When cancer spreads quickly—and when it doesn't 57:43 - Why liquid biopsies may prevent over-treatment 1:02:56 - Exercise-sensitive vs. exercise-resistant cancers 1:06:06 - Prostate cancer therapy—why strength training matters 1:08:10 - When exercise is the only therapy—does it work? 1:09:26 - Why HIIT reduces PSA in prostate cancer 1:11:40 - Avoiding overtreatment—can exercise buy you time? 1:12:00 - Why high-intensity exercise boosts anti-cancer biology 1:13:11 - Turning a diagnosis into a wake-up call 1:16:11 - Why oncologists are rethinking exercise 1:18:50 - Why exercise eases anxiety about cancer—proven psychological benefits 1:25:00 - Before, during, and after treatment 1:27:02 - Why exercise is unique among cancer therapies 1:28:16 - Why cancer patients stop exercising—the risky mistake almost everyone makes 1:30:41 - How to get sedentary cancer patients exercising (realistically) 1:33:15 - The $1 million case for including exercise 1:34:56 - Why recurrence trials haven't convinced doctors—yet 1:37:36 - The bottom-line message 1:37:55 - The myth of a cancer panacea (exercise included) 1:44:07 - What's the best $50 investment for staying active? 1:44:40 - Only 15 minutes per day—what’s the best anti-cancer exercise?

Dr. Rhonda Patrick

220,075 просмотров • 1 год назад

#KimJaeYoung #김재영 #HappyJaeyoungDay #TheJudgeFromHell Since it's his big day, thought I show you a short edit of his beauty & emotions in his most controversial role . 🙃 Below is a somewhat long 🤭 post about him & drama recommendations. My sweetie here is a late bloomer but I have always kept faith that people will see his potential. I liked what this kblogger said that when you see him in TJFH , he feels familiar but yet you might think he's a newcomer. Seems like a rookie but surprised that he's good in acting. If you check his filmography you'd realise he's been acting for more than a decade. JY mentioned that he wasn't sure what to do while in school but he did have a dream of being a chef especially because he helped mum out at home. His father suggested modeling after he was done with military service . He mentioned in an interview he had to shed off 30kg through diet & exercise as he weighed over 100kg .Esteem Academy signed him & he debut as a model in 2010. He got casted in a TVN survival program "Flower Boy Casting". From there, he was inspired to act and landed his 1st supporting role in the movie "No Breathing". (starring SeoInGuk & LeeJongSuk.) If you want to see a young JY in swimwear 😁, you can check him out there. The movie didn't quite make a splash (pun unintended 😁) , and JY who had actually left Esteem to pursue acting, found himself jobless for at least over a year. He auditioned for BladeMan (LeeDongWook & Shin SeKyung's drama) and got casted for a small role. Esteem reached out to him again & he signed with them again to model. He later also joined HB Entertainment for acting jobs, and was with them for a long time. Last year (2023) he left HB and joined his long time manager who had established a new agency, Management S. After Blademan , JY had several supporting roles but his 1st main cast role was in OCN's My Secret Romance. He was the 2nd lead & that was also my first JY drama. While I didn't have SLS, he was such a sweetheart there and caught my attention. My massive crush began when he acted as MooYeon in #100DaysMyPrince as an assassin and the FL's brother. He also had a forbidden love line with the 2ndFL's char played by HanSoHee , and they had great chemie despite limited scenes. I cried my eyes out watching their tragic love story. This is the year (2018) I decided I'll stan this man ☺️😂 His role there opened many doors. He had a short TV series called Dear My Room ( was on the now defunct Olive TV) where he played the romantic ML against Ryoo Hye Young's character. It was one of those friends to lovers trope and I recommend this for a sweet fluffy watch. He also sang the OST with RHY. The big year came in 2019 when he was casted as the ML , Sun Woo in #SecretBoutique, a female centric drama starring KimSunA and GoMinSi . He had a meaty role here as a prosecutor - a bit of a grey character and was somewhat like a brother to the FL (KimSunA) and he had some nice fight scenes. His body was the best here 🔥😋😁. If you don't mind a heavy melodrama, this wasn't bad. And oh boy, was I shipping him hard with GoMinSi's character. I still hope they can reunite for another show & give me closure. 2019-2020 was when I watched a KBS weekender #BeautifulLoveWonderfulLife from start to finish ( raw and with subs - yes my level of dedication surprised me) because JY got casted as Jun Hwi, the ML against another actress I love , Seol In Ah. Gosh, this drama was an emotional roller coaster and was another heavy character. The premise of the story was so sad and the leads went through so much together but I love this show though. He had good chemie with SIA. He also won a KBS acting award here. I recommend this if you can do 50eps and love angst like I do 😂 The role took its toll on JY. He mentioned he needed to take a break but then found himself without work for at least 6-7 months ( if I remember correctly) . Boy, did I miss him. It was really only in an Elle pictorial with his good friend -actor, model and famous youtuber Joo WooJae that I found out he had been having a hard time. He has appeared on WooJae's YT channel several times - they even travel together. JY's come back drama was in #ReflectionOfYou (2021), another heavy melo as the ML who was caught in an emotional tug of war between 2 women played by GoHyunJung and ShinHyunBeen. As WooJae, KJY gave some of his best acting. I know he got a lot of hate 😵‍💫🤣because WooJae was just so obssessed / in love with GHJ's character that he was willing to throw it all for her. This drama is not for the faint hearted but the acting was superb all round - even if the plot would make you uncomfortable. He was so hot here too. JY with longish hair was a dream. In 2022, he was the 2ndML , as KangHaeJin in #LoveInContract. It was so nice to see him play a diva actor and do rom-com for the 1st time. This is a fun watch. While I don't think viewers would have SLS, JY's character wasn't one dimensional either and he had his own storyline despite not being the ML. In 2022 - 2023 he voiced an audio drama , "For Sale - I Broke Up" with Yoon So Hee - but I don't know how we can listen to it internationally (though I do have some vids I would post one day). He also filmed a drama called "We Will Replace The Trip" with Gong SeungYeon, but so far no news of it airing yet. JaeYoung here is shy and unassuming. He's MBTI is INFP. You can see from his interviews he's quite easygoing and humorous. On my highlights- I have subbed some of his videos for TJFH. JY says he still dreams of being a chef and has gone to a 6-month cooking course last year. He also hopes to be able to take on warmer roles going forward.

abs-oluteM

86,307 просмотров • 2 лет назад

260801 Manila Fan Meeting full version 💖 I watched the entire video during my flight back and it’s super entertaining 🤣 so I decided to summarise it and share some key highlights for easier viewing. 4K ▶️ ❌ Do not remove or block my watermark ⚠️ ✅ Subtitles addition are welcome and appreciated! ⸻ Q&A 04:54 – Challenging parts faced while portraying the character 08:02 – Both characters in the series "Broken Of Love" have alter egos. Do they ever see similarities between themselves and their character or perhaps having two different personalities? 10:39 – P’Faye repeats her answer because fans couldn’t hear it clearly due to audio issues 🥹 14:14 – P’Faye and Atom are similar in how they care deeply. When they love or value something, they speak up and give their all. 14:58 – A rom-com series is in the works and may happen before the end of the year. P’Faye asks fans for patience as the team values feedback and wants time to perfect it 💝 18:42 – Re-enactment of a rom-com–coded scene from Broken Of Love ⸻ Game 1: “Boss Battle” (20:21) Rules: Each answers three questions about themselves and each other. Correctly answering for the other person earns a point 23:16 – Q1: What does the other person always bring to work? 25:31 – Atom brings headphones to listen to music and mystery/ghost stories 😨 26:42 – Q2: What is your own and the other person’s secret talent? 29:02 – P’Faye cooks delicious food for Atom 😋 30:32 – Atom’s secret talent is dancing especially Thai dance 32:13 – Q3: What is the last thing you do before sleeping? (Goodnight kiss 💋) 38:13 – Atom won and was crowned boss 40:08 – Three boss victory poses with Boss Atom 🫪 ⸻ Game 2: “Boss Me Around” (41:27) Rules: Answer correctly first to win a round. The winner becomes the “boss” and assigns a punishment for the loser 43:49 – Q1: Where did Arisa and Lalin first meet in the bar? 45:48 – Punishment: P’Faye felt sad and Atom gave her compliments 46:05 – Atom called Faye “POGI” (handsome) 🤣 47:00 – Q2: When did the final episode of Broken of Love premiere on Fabel Entertainment’s YouTube channel? 49:21 – Punishment: P’Faye has back pain and Atom gave her a shoulder massage 😆 51:11 – Q3: In Episode 1, what instrument does Lalin play and what drink did Arisa get for herself from the bar? 52:38 – Faye calls Atom “BABY”👼🏻 54:04 – Punishment: Boss Faye felt sad and needed a hug from Baby Atom ⸻ Game 3: “Deadline Rush” (55:54) 58:17 – P’Faye’s confused reaction to the interpreter explaining the rules is hilarious 😭 61:05 – Round 1: Stamp every page of the document 61:58 – Round 2: Staple documents then remove due to mistake 63:13 – Round 3: Punch two holes on the paper, insert rings through and clip 65:27 – Punishment for Atom: TikTok dance 🤩 65:54 – “Oooh Lala Baby” dance challenge 67:27 – Faye filmed Atom while zooming in and out on Atom’s face 😭😂 69:31 – FayeAtom dance together 😻 72:14 – Faye won but playfully said Atom is the winner 😝 ⸻ 73:13 – Reaction to fan support video 77:35 – Thanking speech for fans’ support 81:01 – Group photo session 🎵🎤 83:06 – Atom performs “Would You Be Mine?” 87:21 – P’Faye performs “Or Is It You?” 92:00 – Teasing fans about both of their fun birthday parties in October 🥳 94:07 – Romantic confetti rain Faye Malisorn อะตวม Fabel Entertainment PERAYA PARIYA IN MANILA #FayeAtomFMinPH2026 #FayePeraya #AtomPariya #FayeAtom

ʝαɳҽƚ🥚

11,763 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

⚫️ UNCANNY VALLEY: THE AI CLASSROOM REVOLUTION: ARE TEACHERS READY? What if AI isn’t just disrupting education… but detonating it? Ethan Mollick, Professor at The Wharton School, joins Dr Danish for one of the most explosive Uncanny Valley episodes, lifting the lid on how classrooms are collapsing, colleges are scrambling, and apprenticeships are vanishing in real time. From AI tutors replacing professors to the rise of one-person unicorns, this isn’t just a change in learning…it’s a reset of work, meaning, and what it even takes to succeed. This episode doesn’t ask whether AI will change education. It shows you how it already has. Fridays at 4:20PM ET. Only on 𝕏. 00:18 – Is AI destroying school, or forcing us to teach better? 01:13 – “100% they’re cheating.” The honesty about academic dishonesty. 02:41 – Why good pedagogy still matters—even with AI tutors. 03:51 – Elon Musk says college is obsolete. Is he right — or just early? 05:01 – “AI gives you the answer—but you don’t learn.” The Turkey study. 06:31 – From calculators to GPT: How cheating evolves—and what to do. 08:24 – What the flipped AI-powered classroom of the future looks like. 09:23 – Inside Ethan’s Wharton classes: Simulations, games, and AI everywhere. 10:09 – “AI is an always-on tutor.” What humans still do better. 11:08 – Can AI actually launch a company? Where Ethan draws the line. 12:44 – “AI cofounder” is real, but jagged edges still slow it down. 14:07 – Why bad ideas fail faster when filtered through AI. 15:45 – Confidence vs. capability: the psychology of starting up. 16:51 – The average founder is 42. What that really means for AI. 18:04 – Will a flood of new entrepreneurs fix—or break—the market? 19:50 – AI as advisor: How a chatbot could help your catering business. 21:37 – Why most Americans are founders-in-waiting—and AI unlocks them. 22:30 – Prototyping is cracked. Scaling? Not yet. 24:33 – Youth unemployment and the collapse of on-the-job learning. 25:51 – “The apprenticeship model is broken.” And how to fix it. 27:06 – Losing the talent pipeline — and why companies must step up. 28:22 – Why the youth don’t want factory jobs—and shouldn’t. 29:26 – Is AGI inevitable—or just imagined? 31:07 – What should we teach our kids? The answer might scare you. 32:27 – Bundled jobs, fragmented futures: how humans stay relevant. 33:59 – The real singularity? When we can’t predict what happens next. 35:25 – The AI assumption no one wants to question. 36:55 – What are agents, really? Why no one agrees on the definition. 37:55 – Co-intelligence vs. substitution: what agents skip over. 38:50 – Plain-English goals, rogue pricing, and collusion-by-default. 40:02 – Nested agents are here, and Wharton’s building them. 40:58 – Management > Coding: What great prompters actually do. 41:12 – Product managers might be more vital than ever.

Mario Nawfal

1,613,286 просмотров • 1 год назад

I am the Senior Vice President of Late Night Strategy at CBS. I am the person who turned a comedian into a priest and charged advertisers to watch the congregation. I want to be precise about what I built. Not a comedy show. A permission structure. For eleven years, six million Americans tuned in every night to find out what they were allowed to believe by morning. We didn't sell jokes. We sold certainty. Certainty costs nothing to produce. People will pay anything for it. We charged $50 million a year and still lost money because it turns out permission is even cheaper than we thought. In 2014, we had a genuinely dangerous comedian. A man who once testified before Congress in character as a fictional conservative pundit and made the entire chamber look like they'd been pantsed on C-SPAN. His fake persona was the most brilliant satire on television. Layered. Ironic. Unpredictable. The character could say anything because nothing was real. The character was the art. The character was the comedian. We killed the character and put the real man on stage. The real man was a lecturer. Earnest. Thoughtful. Correct about everything. Correct is not funny. Correct is not dangerous. Correct is the absence of danger. We promoted the absence of danger and called it growth. His character could make a Senate committee squirm. The real him makes an audience nod. Nodding pays the same as squirming. Nodding is easier to produce. His final words on air were "We love doing this show for you, but what we really, really love is doing this show with you." The audience wept. I wrote that line. Not the words. The architecture that made those words feel true. For eleven years, the audience believed they were participants. They were not participants. They were the product. "With you" is what you say to a congregation. A comedian says "at you." We hadn't said "at you" since 2015. Our internal metric was called Affirm Rate. It measured the percentage of monologue segments that generated applause instead of laughter. I invented this metric. I also invented the bonus structure tied to it. In 2015, our Affirm Rate was 34%. By 2022, it was 94%. I received a raise every year. We are crushing it. At the things I made up. That's performance management. But I need to tell you about the real discovery. The one I put in a deck called "Content Strategy 2019-2024." The one that got me promoted. Agreement gets applause. I knew that early. But correction — telling the audience their vocabulary is slightly outdated, their outrage is aimed two degrees off-center, their feelings are valid but their phrasing needs work — correction gets them back tomorrow. Agreement is a transaction. Correction is a subscription. We converted a comedy show into a nightly software update for moral vocabulary. Churn was near zero. They couldn't afford to miss an episode. Missing an episode meant using last week's words in this week's meeting. That's social death. We monetized the fear of social death and called it entertainment. I want to be honest about something. The content was not bipartisan. We chose a side. But I need you to understand: we did not choose it because we believed in it. We chose it because that side's audience is more responsive to correction. They want to be updated. They want to be told their language is outdated. They experience correction as care. The other side does not respond to correction. They respond to provocation. Provocation is harder to monetize. You can't build a subscription on provocation because the audience doesn't come back to learn — they come back to fight. Fighting is unpredictable. Correction is scheduled. We optimized for the audience that wants to be told what to think. That audience leaned one direction. That's not ideology. That's market segmentation. The writers' room had a whiteboard. In 2015 it said "What's funny?" In 2018 it said "What should they feel?" By 2021 it said "What are they still saying wrong?" I watched that whiteboard evolve like a finch beak and I never intervened. The market was speaking. We listened. Listening to the market is the same as leading the audience. They can't tell the difference. A writer named Marcus raised his hand in 2019. "What if we just tried to make them laugh again?" I thanked him for his passion and scheduled a creative alignment conversation. He transferred to streaming development within the month. The Affirm Rate the week he left was 91%. Laughter would have brought it down. That's risk management. Here is what nobody will say out loud. I will say it because I am proud of it. We made our audience worse at politics. Not better. Worse. Every night for eleven years, we expressed their outrage for them. Professionally. With a band and good lighting. And because the outrage had been expressed — because a man in a suit had furrowed his brow with the precise calibrated degree of indignation — they didn't need to express it themselves. They watched. They clapped. They felt the catharsis of resistance without resisting anything. They went to bed having done nothing and feeling like they'd done something. That's the product. Not comedy. Not information. Catharsis. Catharsis is the enemy of action. A man who has screamed into a pillow does not then also scream in the street. We were the pillow. A $50 million pillow with a house band. If you feel the outrage has been expressed for you, you will not march. You will not organize. You will not call your representative. You will tune in tomorrow to feel it expressed again. That's retention. Our retention was extraordinary. I want to talk about the comedy-to-catechism pipeline because I think people underestimate what we achieved. Stage one: comedian makes jokes about the powerful. Audience laughs because the powerful are absurd. This is the Carlin model. The jester punches up. Everyone below feels relief. Stage two: comedian makes jokes about people who disagree with the audience. Audience laughs because disagreement is stupid. The jester has turned around. He's still on the stage but now he's facing the crowd with a pointer. Stage three: comedian stops making jokes. Comedian identifies incorrect beliefs and explains why they're dangerous. Audience does not laugh. Audience claps. The jester is gone. In his place: a hall monitor with a desk and a band. Stage four: audience watches not for entertainment but for certification. Having seen last night's episode means you know which words are current. Not having seen it means you might use yesterday's vocabulary in today's meeting. The show is no longer comedy. It is a credential. Watching it means you are educated. Not watching means you are the person being discussed. We made a show that you watch to prove you're not the kind of person who doesn't watch it. That's a closed loop. Closed loops don't need content. They need continuity. We provided continuity for $50 million a year. A comedian — whose entire historical function was to say things too dangerous for anyone else to say — became the person who decides which things are too dangerous for anyone to say. And the audience applauded. Every night. For 2,500 nights. Because being told what is forbidden feels exactly like being told what you already knew. Prohibition performed as validation. I put that in the deck too. Our audience was correct about everything. I know this because they applauded everything we said. The applause proved the correctness. The correctness justified the applause. We called this audience research. The methodology was peer-reviewed by the audience. They approved unanimously. Every night. The actually funny comedians left. They went to podcasts. To clubs. To rooms where the audience doesn't know what's coming and that uncertainty is the point. They took the laughter with them. We kept the applause. We called those spaces problematic. That's market differentiation. The problematic spaces are funnier. But funny is not our product. We lost $40 million a year. We didn't lose it because the show failed. We lost it because we spent $50 million producing what a podcast host in his garage gives away between mattress ads. The podcast is funnier. The podcast is more dangerous. The podcast has an audience that laughs instead of claps. But we had the Ed Sullivan Theater. We had 461 seats. We had a former Beatle play the farewell episode. Paul McCartney, Elvis Costello, Jon Batiste, and Louis Cato playing "Hello, Goodbye" like it was a benediction. I booked a Beatle for a funeral. The Beatles played that stage in 1964 and the audience screamed so loud you couldn't hear the music. Our audience didn't scream. They wept politely. That's the difference between entertainment and church. We ran a church. Jon Stewart showed up to the finale and did a bit where he pretended to deliver a corporate statement from Paramount about the cancellation. The audience laughed. It was the first time they laughed in a way I didn't recognize. Involuntary. Surprised. Dangerous. For ninety seconds, a comedian was in that building. Then it was over. John Oliver said "At some point, this may come for all of our shows" and then added "but Stephen, what's important to remember is that tonight, it is going to eat you." The audience laughed again. Involuntary again. Two moments of actual comedy in a three-hour farewell. Both of them about death. The finale drew 6.74 million viewers. Biggest weeknight audience in our history. More people came to the funeral than ever visited the patient. I know what they were mourning. Not comedy. The comedy died in 2016. Not the man. The man is fine. He's wealthy. What they mourned was the permission structure. Starting today, they have to decide what to believe on their own. They have to form an opinion without waiting for a man behind a desk to form it first and deliver it with a knowing look. Some of them haven't done that since 2015. The funeral wasn't for the show. It was for the certainty. He joked about the Peanuts theme music licensing cost on his last night. "Oh no! I hope this doesn't cost CBS any money!" The audience laughed. It was a joke about money. About the network losing money. The last joke was about money. Not about truth. Not about power. About a licensing fee for a cartoon piano riff. Eleven years and the final joke was about accounting. I think that's perfect. The show was always about accounting. We just dressed it up as conscience. The President of the United States — the man we spent eleven years explaining was dangerous to an audience that already believed he was dangerous — posted an AI-generated video of our host being thrown into a dumpster on the Late Show set. Then Trump danced to "YMCA" in the clip. Viewed more times in four hours than our farewell managed in a week. His production cost: zero. Ours: negative $50 million a year. We manufactured his relevance every night at 11:35 for eleven years and he never paid us a dime. We were his marketing department. He turned our funeral into content. His ROI was infinite. Ours required a write-off and a farewell concert. The Strike Force Five — Fallon, Kimmel, Meyers, Oliver — appeared in a segment about late-night losing "one middle-aged white man who makes jokes about the news." They were joking about their own obsolescence. All of them know. None of them will say it. The format is dead. The audience moved to phones. The phones don't have desks or bands. The phones have men in garages who are allowed to be wrong, allowed to be surprised, allowed to say something their audience hasn't already approved. That's comedy. We stopped doing that a decade ago. We did approval. Approval looks like comedy from a distance. Up close it's church. I do not feel guilt. Guilt would require me to believe I took something from them. I didn't take anything. They came to us. Every night. They chose the catechism over the comedy. They preferred correction over surprise. Certainty over danger. Instruction over laughter. They wanted to be told. Not challenged. Not shocked. Not made to laugh against their will at something they didn't see coming. They wanted to see it coming. They wanted to mouth along. That's not comedy. That's karaoke. We ran the most expensive karaoke bar in television history and the only miscalculation was charging a cover when the songs are free on every phone. We turned a jester into a priest. We turned an audience into a congregation. We turned laughter into obedience. We turned political engagement into passive consumption. We turned a comedy show into a permission structure and charged $50 million a year to tell people what they already believed in a voice slightly nicer than their own. They were so grateful they showed up to mourn us. 6.74 million of them. Weeping. For the certainty. Applause is more reliable than laughter. I proved it. The proof cost $450 million, one character, one comedian's capacity for danger, and one audience's willingness to act. The metric went up.

Peter Girnus 🦅

2,113,325 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🚨❓🛸 Breaking: What the Heck is Going On? 👽❓🚨 Senior White House Officials: We cannot find any copies of the DIA's AAWSAP records. Robert Bigelow: "We have copies of everything [from AAWSAP]." (Please spread this far and wide and tag the appropriate people. Aaron Lukas Stephen Miller Donald J. Trump BigelowPodcast Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS). Let's get these folks together.) ~ Ainsley Earhardt: "....is releasing new documents that might provide proof of extraterrestrial life, including decades-old, never-before-seen UFO footage." Brian Brian Kilmeade: "Really? We should have led with this." Lawrence Jones: "Right. Peter Doocy joins us live from the White House with this exclusive. Hey, Peter." (Doocy has been kicking ass with his reporting on UAP.) Peter Doocy: "Good morning. I was summoned to an office in the West Wing yesterday for a private briefing about these files that you're about to see on your screen for the first time ever. "Let's show the first clip. It was taken by a Navy aerial photographer. His name was Delbert Newhouse. It was taken along a Utah highway. If you look closely, it looks like a drone swarm, but there were no known drones in the sky when this video was taken in 1952. "I am told they took the first and only copy of this film. They found it in the National Archives. It has been digitized into 4K to be released right here for the first time today." (I watched it today. Film footage from 1952 that's turned into 4K isn't much clearer. But...the Newhouse film clip was first released in 1956, and it was stabilized and posted on YouTube in recent years and that's much better than what was released today. I'm no expert on everything historical in ufology but I'll share something on that 1952 sighting in another post that's MUCH better than what was put out today by our government.) Doocy: "The second clip we have taken by a law enforcement officer's iPhone along a busy Colorado highway three years ago. The officer's narration and some nearby buildings have been redacted. I heard the unredacted version, though, and he is describing multiple orbs hovering over a sensitive military installation for 15 minutes at a time. This one was three years ago. "And then we have a third clip taken by a drone over the Middle East last year. It shows six objects flying in formation, destination unknown. The Pentagon looks at this, they say they do not know what they are looking at on the screen. "And then there's this. There is a newly declassified copy of an expense report, a line-by-line expense report, going through the $22 million dollars that the DIA spent to investigate repeated, years-long claims over something called Skinwalker Ranch. Claims of extra...things in the sky, UFOs, UAPs." (This was AAWSAP and it wasn't focused just on Skinwalker Ranch. Not even close. Read, "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon" by Drs. James Lacatski and Colm Kelleher, and award-winning, investigative journalist, George Knapp, for an inside look at that program. And the three follow-up books, with the last two authored by Lacatski himself). Doocy: "Harry Reid, before he passed away - this was in 2008 - got $22 million dollars to investigate this. Officials now are telling me, senior White House officials are telling me, they cannot find any copy of the records. They've got all the proof that this government contractor was spending $22 million dollars to do this investigation, but when folks high up at the White House who can just pick up the phone and say, 'I need a copy of those records,' make the call, they are being told that if these records were created, they are either lost or something happened to them. "Somebody has them; they are not available to White House officials right now. Which kind of seems like one of these UFO movies where it gets to the Oval Office and the president has to be told that there are certain things that are too classified even for the president." (Those senior White House officials should contact the guy who briefed Trump in the Oval Office in February on UFOs: Robert Bigelow. Bigelow's company, BAASS (Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies), was the contractor for that program.) Here's Bigelow on Episode 2 of The Bigelow Podcast: Bigelow: "BAASS, our organization, we have the 38 papers. We have copies of everything [from AAWSAP]." George Knapp: "The DIRDs." Bigelow: "We have everything. We have all the other papers going up to about approximately 100. So, DIA has those someplace." Knapp: "But they deny it. They say, 'We don't have 'em.'" Bigelow: "Well, I don't know. They could be buried in a frigging trailer or the back of a car somewhere in the trunk and put into a cellar. I don't know where it is, but we have ours, we have copies of everything. (Problem solved. I'm sure those senior White House officials will be on a plane to Las Vegas once they see my tweet. 🙄) Bigelow: "I don't think it's our business to go around the government and divulge ours without sanction of proof, without approval. I mean, without approval. I feel uncomfortable about that. I don't mind the 38 papers (which have been public for years). I think beyond that, I'm uncomfortable by not having some kind of official, ass-covering approval, you know?" (I disagree. The American taxpayers paid for that. Release it all. They then go on the discuss how personal details of people involved would need to be scrubbed if those papers were to ever be made public. No problem with that. But Mr. Bigelow has had a decade and a half to do that. Either way, that should NOT stop Mr. Bigelow from calling his contact at the White House (or vice verse), doubling down, and saying, "I have ALL of the AAWSAP data. Come to Vegas and I'll let you see it all.") Doocy: "But, we should stress, again, officials do not know what the objects are in these videos that are gonna go wide online after this report." Kilmeade: "Now they don't know, Peter, but do you know? Doocy: "[long pause] Can't say." [All laugh. I like the comedy.] Jones: "Well played." Kilmeade: I would check a burn bag in the FBI building. Jones: "Right, exactly." Earhardt: "He used to know, he wiped the record. They just look like white dots to me. I mean, How do we know that's not a drone?" Kilmeade: "Well, it's the 50s." Earhardt: "I know, but they're just like, white dots." (Exactly. Interesting, but it will NOT move the needle with the masses. We have no idea what those white dots represent and they're not making any incredible maneuvers. But it's still coverage of UFOs on a national news show that has a lot of viewers who aren't into UFOs, like us. So, not a bad thing.) Doocy: "Well, the one clip is from a guy in 1952, and so you look at a lot of this stuff now. It's like, oh well, maybe that's a lens flare, maybe it's a hobbyist, maybe it's a weather balloon. But in 1952, there was not a lot of stuff up in the sky. And so, when you look at a video like this, yes, it is old, but it kind of creates a decades-long storyline. We know that these are things that have been a curiosity of humans on Earth for generations, and this is why. And this is a really clear clip that puts into focus - clearer focus, 4K - what some of these guys were...said that they were seeing." (Excellent summary and context by Doocy.) Earhardt: "Were you able to look through the expense report? What are some of the expenses? How'd they spend $22 million dollars?" Kilmeade: "Wow." Earhardt: "And there are no records?" Jones: "Nothing to show for it." Doocy: "I've got it. It's 59 pages long, and some of the stuff is still blocked out. But you know it's got dates. A lot of the stuff is 2008 and 2009. $2.8 million dollars, $3.6 million dollars, $2.1 million dollars. It's a well-respected government contractor (Bigelow's company, BAASS) that was doing this." (I have ChatGPT trying to find this 59-page document and so far it has struck out. We know they had 50 full time investigators over a 27-month period and they all had to be paid. Plus, they had to retrofit buildings in case they received classified UAP-related materials, allegedly from Lockheed, or elsewhere. And, in 2021, I was told the DIRDs cost $15,000 a piece or $570,000 for all 38 studies.) Doocy: "And again, it was Harry Reid out in Nevada who had an interest in UFOs because there are a lot of sightings out there. Harry Reid is the one who got the $22 million dollars of government money appropriated for this." (Kilmeade scoffs. He should know that it was the late Senators Reid (D), Inouye (D) and Stevens (R) who helped fund AAWSAP to the tune of $22 million. This shouldn't be a partisan issue.) Doocy: "Somebody went and investigated, and the files...they just can't find them. Maybe they will turn up at some point, but it is noteworthy that, given all of the interest and all the money that was spent, that somebody from the West Wing of the White House calls and they can't produce the files." Earhardt: "It disappeared." Kilmeade: "Should check [Reid's] estate. Check Harry Reid's closet." Earhardt: "Or someone's bank account (laughs)." (Or make a phone call to Mr. Bigelow. Long-distance calls are free nowadays. To insinuate that Reid pocketed any of that money is ridiculous, and partisan. Also...apparently, Bigelow spent $1 million of his own money to keep the program going towards the end.) Jones: "They think we're all stupid. The only person that knows is the dead senator, right? I mean, come on. Thanks, Peter." Earhardt: "Very interesting. All right, thank you Peter." Kilmeade: "There's an excellent chance they're gonna be friendly." (Based on what?) Earhardt: "Oh, the aliens?" Kilmeade; "And just tell us what they know. Why are they able to move so quick?"

Joe Murgia

53,991 просмотров • 12 дней назад

🚨EXCLUSIVE: The untold story of the FBI’s J6 pipe bomber “Person of Interest #2”🚨 If what the FBI’s January 6 pipe bomber “Person of Interest #2” (POI2) told me about his FBI interview is true, there is further proof that the Bureau has covered up, or “deleted,” additional video footage about what happened when the RNC pipe bomb was allegedly discovered by Karlin Younger on January 6, 2021. I will not reveal the identity or any other identifying information about the FBI’s POI2 in the January 6 pipe bomb saga. I also won't discuss the full five hours of personal interview time with POI2; instead, I will focus on two key pieces of information he gave me. As a primer for those not already following this story in detail, here is a brief rundown of the facts in POI2’s case and why the FBI was initially interested in him as a “person of interest”: -POI2 does not live in the Greater D.C. area. He lives in a large American city in a state that does not border D.C. -From news releases, congressional reports, FBI statements, and an FBI whistleblower disclosure, we know that POI2 was visiting a lifelong acquaintance (POI3) at his residence in Fall Church, VA, over the course of January 4 - 7, 2021. -POI2 used POI3’s Metrorail card for travel back and forth to the District on the 5th and 6th. -POI2 caught the attention of law enforcement investigators when he emerged from D.C.’s Metro South rail station on January 5, changed hats and put on dark sunglasses, then beelined straight across the street from the station into the Rumsey Court alley behind the Republican National Committee headquarters. It was in that alley that POI2 began taking photos of “numbers.” Numbers on trash cans, dumpsters, door addresses, and the like. According to the FBI, POI2 planned to use those photographs in a forthcoming book. (To date, that book has not been published.) Then, after walking around Capitol Hill all day long, and even attending some of the J5 protest events, POI2 ducked back into the same alley for a few minutes — after dark — before returning to the Metro South station across the street from the RNC. He returned to Falls Church via the train, where POI3 picked him up by car, and they went back to POI3’s home. POI2 then returned to DC the next morning to attend Trump’s speech at The Ellipse on the 6th. -POI2 was cleared of suspicion following two FBI interviews on January 19, 2021, at his residence in his home city. These interviews took place six days after the FBI pulled their Special Operations Group (SOG) surveillance team off POI3’s home on January 13, just two days after they were deployed to watch the infamous Falls Church, VA condominium address where we now know POI3 shared a firewall between his address and the then residence of former Capitol Police officer Shauni Kerkhoff. The subject of our November 8, 2025 story published by Blaze Media. How I came to spend five hours with POI2 I met with POI2 twice, on December 11 and 12, 2025. On the 11th, a member of our team accompanied me: a retired FBI veteran of 25 years now working as a private investigator. That first interview lasted for three hours, and then the next day I met with POI2, just him and me, for another two hours. I arrived in POI2’s home city on the 10th to do some early recon. We had POI2’s name (which I’d acquired from a congressional source), and his address, but we didn’t have a current phone number. After running an extensive background on him, we learned a lot about his life and work, social media, friends and close associates, and even where he attends church, but we still didn't have a phone number to call him and ask for a meeting. Most interesting of all, POI2 is a prolific international traveler. In one recent year, he had logged over 40 international flights. So we didn’t even know if he’d be in the country, much less at home, if we knocked on this door. My recon of his address was a huge disappointment. His apartment building is one of those old inner-city manufacturing plants refitted into modern, upscale housing. The entire property is ringed by tall wrought-iron fencing, with electronic security for entry into the parking garage, foot traffic, and into the building itself. There was no visible way for us to just pay him a visit for a “knock and talk.” Perhaps we could have “buzzed” him from an exterior gate, but I didn’t get that far that day. Later that evening, I picked up my team member from the airport — the retired FBI guy — and we went to dinner for a long, late-night planning session. We identified a couple of strong local personal connections he had via his Facebook page, and we planned to visit them first, get more info about POI2, and maybe even get their help reaching out to him. At 9:00 a.m. the next morning, we arrived at the home of someone who seemed like they might be closest to him. We were lucky and hit a home run on the first swing. Without the long details, our “story” about why we were looking for POI2 — their close friend — worked like a charm, and we were invited into their home. Our host called POI2, and within two hours POI2 joined us at our new friend’s home. Luckily, POI2 had returned to the States from an overseas trip only the day before. For the next three hours, I asked most of the questions while my partner listened and observed. Based on my partner’s 25+ years of experience with the FBI, he believed POI2 answered everything truthfully … “Or, he’s a very, very good liar.” My partner had to fly back home the next morning, but I had many follow-up questions for POI2. I reached out again early in the morning, and he agreed to meet me at a coffee shop in his neighborhood. ***(On a personal timeline aside: during my second interview with POI2, I was only nine days away from my heart failure episode, and was already struggling to breath after the slightest of physical exertions.)*** The most significant reveal We met at 1:30 p.m., and spent another two full hours together. During this session, we had a detailed conversation about his two interviews with two FBI special agents. Both of those interviews were on the same day. January 19, 2021. POI2 had explained to the FBI agents that the reason he returned to the Rumsey Court alley behind the RNC was that he remembered there were several trash cans in the alley, and he wanted to dispose of an empty plastic water bottle before going back to the train station. I asked him why he didn’t simply throw the bottle away at the Metrotrain station. He shrugged. From our video review, POI2 only stayed in the alley for about three to four minutes. But if what he revealed to me is true, it is one of the most significant discoveries in our years-long pipe bomb investigation. POI2 shared with me that the FBI agents told him that he had thrown the empty water bottle away in the very trash container next to where the bomb would be placed a little over an hour and a half later. Why that is significant FIRST, it reveals that the FBI most likely had video of him depositing that empty bottle into that container. Yes … they could have taken DNA samples of every item in that trash can, but then they would also have needed DNA from POI2 in their database. POI2 didn’t offer that option as their explanation. He assumed they saw him on camera. I can personally attest that there is currently a camera in Rumsey Court that would cover the area where the bomb was placed, but I do not know if that same camera existed in January of 2021. But if they did observe POI2, on camera, tossing the bottle in the trash can immediately next to where the bomb was placed, then the FBI most certainly has video of Karlin Younger — the FirstNet employee — who discovered that device at approximately 12:35 p.m. the next day, January 6. Only 25 minutes before Vice President Mike Pence was to drop the gavel on the joint session of Congress to certify the 2020 Electoral College presidential vote. Only about 18 minutes before the first breach of that outer bike rack barricade on the west Capitol grounds, led by Ray Epps, Ryan Samsel, and other suspicious characters. Many investigators, including Congressman Loudermilk and his committee, have posited that the two devices placed by the gray hooded bomber on J5 were retrieved at some point in the early morning hours of J6, then replaced just before their “discovery” a few minutes either side of 1:00 p.m. The allegedly “deleted” video from the two DNC cameras that provided the footage of the gray hooded bomber placing a device on the evening of J5 would have also shown us what happened after midnight. Whether or not the two plainclothes Capitol Police counter-surveillance officers were the ones who replaced the device just before reporting its discovery to the Secret Service agents attending VP-Elect Kamala Harris’s presence inside the building at the time. (Article to that story linked in comments below.) A camera aimed at the RNC drop location would give us the same information about what happened during the night, and when Karlin Younger discovered that device while walking back and forth and doing her laundry. The FBI claims that the footage from the two DNC cameras — after that device was planted under a bench — was accidentally deleted. (No one buys that story.) Those two FBI agents may also have inadvertently revealed to POI2 that video footage exists from that dark corner of the RNC/Capitol Hill Club alley on J5 and J6. Both missing videos, if they were to surface, would either invalidate all conspiracy theories about the pipe bombs, or confirm the prevailing theories and circumstantial evidence pointing to law enforcement participation and a multi-agency conspiracy. SECOND, if the two FBI agents were telling POI2 the truth about that specific trash container, then it brings into question all of POI2’s own statements about why he returned to that alley after dark. That very trash can was in the furthest and darkest corner of the RNC/Capitol Hill Club side of Rumsey Court. He would have had to ignore several of the first and most clearly visible, well-lit trash bins upon his arrival into that alley by way of the walkway between the RNC and the Capitol Hill Club. Instead, he made a hard left behind the Capitol Hill Club and headed toward the darkest corner of the alley, from which the view of that trash can was also likely obstructed by one or more cars typically parked between him and what would be his line of sight to that dark corner. This implies POI2 was either on a recon mission to determine the best drop location for the second device, or, as one retired, formerly high-ranking law enforcement officer has theorized, he may have placed an AirTag or other electronic beacon to lead the bomber to the most advantageous location to deposit the bomb. Near the end of my second meeting with POI2, he shared with me several photos of “numbers” he took in that alley. He shared the “time and location” data from those original photos on his iPhone. He also gave me screenshots from his phone’s call history of the exact moment the two FBI agents phoned him for both interviews on January 19, 2021. He was very earnest, forthcoming, and eager to answer all my questions. (Photo examples in comments below.) As a person, I like POI2. We could be friends. But either he or the FBI is lying about what happened in that dark corner behind the Capitol Hill Club. (Maybe both?) Just as POI2 and I were about to say goodbye and shake hands, I opened my phone to show him one photo. It was the shot I took of the two side-by-side doors at the condo complex in Falls Church, VA. The door on the left was the home of his lifelong acquaintance, POI3. The door on the right was Shauni Kerkhoff's January 6 residence. I asked him: “Can you make this math work for me?” He replied: “No, man. That’s so weird.” We have stayed in contact and spoken many times since those two days in December. ⬇️

Steve Baker

911,031 просмотров • 23 дней назад

The fight between Anthropic and the DoW is a warning shot. Right now, LLMs are probably not being used in mission critical ways. But within 20 years, 99% of the workforce in the military, the government, and the private sector will be AIs. This includes the soldiers (by which I mean the robot armies), the superhumanly intelligent advisors and engineers, the police, you name it. Our future civilization will run on AI labor. And as much as the government’s actions here piss me off, in a way I’m glad this episode happened - because it gives us the opportunity to think through some extremely important questions about who this future workforce will be accountable and aligned to, and who gets to determine that. What Hegseth should have done Obviously the DoW has the right to refuse to use Anthropic’s models because of these redlines. In fact, I think the government’s case had they done so would be very reasonable, especially given the ambiguity of concepts like autonomous weapons or mass surveillance. Honestly, for this reason, if I was the Defense Secretary, I would probably actually refuse to do this deal with Anthropic. Imagine if in the future, there’s a Democratic administration, and Elon Musk is negotiating some SpaceX contract to give the military access to Starlink. And suppose if Elon said, “I reserve the right to cancel this contract if I determine that you’re using Starlink technology to wage a war not authorized by Congress.” On the face of it, that language seems reasonable - but as the military, you simply can’t give a private company a kill switch on technology your operations have come to rely on, especially if you have an an acrimonious and low trust relationship with said contractor - as in fact Anthropic has with the current administration. If the government had just said, “Hey we’re not gonna do business with you,” that would have been fine, and I would not have felt the need to write this blog post. Instead the government has threatened to destroy Anthropic as a private business, because Anthropic refuses to sell to the government on terms the government commands. If upheld, this Supply Chain Restriction would mean that Amazon and Google and Nvidia and Palantir would need to ensure Claude isn't touching any of their Pentagon work. Anthropic would be able to survive this designation today. But given the way AI is going, eventually AI is not gonna be some party trick addendum to these contractors’ products that can just be turned off. It'll be woven into how every product is built, maintained, and operated. For example, the code for the AWS services that the DoW uses will be written by Claude - is that a supply chain risk? In a world with ubiquitous and powerful AI, it's actually not clear to me that these big tech companies will be able to cordon off the use of Claude in order to keep working with the Pentagon. And that raises a question the Department of War probably hasn't thought through. If AI really is that pervasive and powerful, then when forced to choose between their AI provider and a DoW contract that represents a tiny fraction of their revenue, wouldn’t most tech companies drop the government, not the AI? So what's the Pentagon's plan — to coerce and threaten to destroy every single company that won't give them what they want on exactly their terms? The whole background of this AI conversation is that we’re in a race with China, and we have to win. But what is the reason we want America to win the AI race? It’s because we want to make sure free open societies can defend themselves. We don't want the winner of the AI race to be a government which operates on the principle that there is no such thing as a truly private company or a private citizen. And that if the state wants you to provide them with a service on terms you find morally objectionable, you are not allowed to refuse. And if you do refuse, the government will try to destroy your ability to do business. Are we racing to beat the CCP in AI just so that we can adopt the most ghoulish parts of their system? Now, people will say, "Oh, well, our government is democratically elected, so it's not the same thing if they tell you what you must do." I refuse to accept this idea that if a democratically elected leader hypothetically wants to do mass surveillance on his citizens or wants to violate their rights or punish them for political reasons, that not only is that okay, but that you have a duty to help him. The overhangs of tyranny Mass surveillance is, at least in certain forms, legal. It just has been impractical so far. Under current law, you have no Fourth Amendment protection over data you share with a third party, including your bank, your phone carrier, your ISP, and your email provider. The government reserves the right to purchase and obtain and read this data in bulk without a warrant. What's been missing is the ability to actually do anything with all of this data — no agency has the manpower to monitor every camera feed, cross-reference every transaction, or read every message. But that bottleneck goes away with AI. There are 100 million CCTV cameras in America. You can get pretty good open source multimodal models for 10 cents per million input tokens. So if you process a frame every ten seconds, and each frame is 1,000 tokens, you’re looking at a yearly cost of about 30 billion dollars to process every single camera in America. And remember that a given level of AI ability gets 10x cheaper year over year - so a year from now it’ll cost 3 billion, and then a year after 300 million, and by 2030, it might be cheaper for the government to be able to understand what is going on in every single nook and cranny of this country than it is to remodel to the White House. Once the technical capacity for mass surveillance and political suppression exists, the only thing standing between us and an authoritarian surveillance state is the political expectation that this is not something we do here. And this is why I think what Anthropic did here is so valuable and commendable, because it is helping set that norm and precedent. AI structurally favors mass surveillance What we’re learning from this episode is that the government actually has way more leverage over private companies than we realized. Even if this supply chain restriction is backtracked (which prediction markets currently give it a 81% chance of happening), the President has so many different ways in which he can make your life difficult if you’re a company that is resisting him. The federal government controls permitting for new power generation, which is needed for datacenters. It oversees antitrust enforcement. The federal government has contracts with all the other big tech companies whom Anthropic needs to partner with for chips and for funding - and they could make it an unspoken condition for such contracts that those companies can no longer do business with Anthropic. People have proposed that the real problem here is that there’s only 3 leading AI companies. This creates a clear and narrow target for the government to apply leverage on in order to get what they want out of this technology. But if there’s wide diffusion, then from the government’s perspective, the situation is even easier. Maybe the best models of early 2027 (if you engineered the safeguards out) - the Claude 6 and Gemini 5 - will be capable of enabling mass surveillance. But by late 2027, and certainly by 2028, there will be open source models that do the same thing. So in 2028, the government can just say, “Oh Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, you’re drawing a line in the sand? No issue - I’ll just run some open source model that might not be at the frontier, but is definitely smart enough to note-take a camera feed.” The more fundamental problem is just that even if the three leading companies draw lines in the sand, and are even willing to get destroyed in order to preserve those lines, it doesn’t really change the fact that the technology itself is just a big boon to mass surveillance and control over the population. Then the question is, what do we do about it? Honestly, I don’t have an answer. You'd hope there's some symmetric property of the technology — some way we as citizens can use AI to check government power as effectively as the government can use AI to monitor and control its population. But realistically, I just don’t think that’s how it’s going to shake out. You can think of AI as giving everybody more leverage on whatever assets and authority they currently have. And the government is already starting with a monopoly of violence. Which they can now supercharge with extremely obedient employees that will not question the government's orders. Alignment - to whom? And this gets us to the issue of alignment. What I have just described to you - an army of extremely obedient employees - is what it would look like if alignment succeeded - that is, we figured out at a technical level how to get AI systems to follow someone’s intentions. And the reason it sounds scary when I put it in terms of mass surveillance or robot armies is that there is a very important question at the heart of alignment which we just haven’t discussed much as a society. Because up till now, AIs were just capable enough to make the question relevant: to whom or what should the AIs be aligned? In what situations should the AI defer to the end user versus the model company versus the law versus its own sense of morality? This is maybe the most important question about what happens with powerful AI systems. And we barely talk about it. It’s understandable why we don’t hear much about it. If you’re a model company, you don’t really wanna be advertising that you have complete control over a document that determines the preferences and character of what will eventually be almost the entire labor force, not just for private sector companies, but also for the military and the civilian government. We’re getting to see, with this DoW/Anthropic spat, a much earlier version of the highest stakes negotiations in history. By the way, make no mistake about it - with real AGI the stakes are even much higher than mass surveillance. This is just the example that has come up already relatively early on in the development of AGI. The military insists that the law already prohibits mass surveillance, and so Anthropic should agree to let their models be used for “all lawful purposes”. Of course, as we saw from the 2013 Snowden revelations, even in this specific example of mass surveillance , the government has shown that it will use secret and deceptive interpretations of the law to justify its actions. Remember, what we learned from Snowden was that the NSA, which, by the way, is part of the Department of War, used the 2001 Patriot Act’s authorization to collect any records "relevant" to an investigation to justify collecting literally every phone record in America. The argument went that it was all "relevant" because some subset might prove useful in some future investigation. They ran this program for years under secret court approval. So when the Pentagon today says, "We would never use AI for mass surveillance, it's already illegal, your red lines are unnecessary", it would be extremely naive to take that at face value. No government is going to call its own actions "mass surveillance". For the government, it will always have a different label. So then Anthropic comes back and says, "No, we want red lines separate from 'all lawful purposes,' and we want the right to refuse you service when we believe those red lines are being violated." But think about it from the military’s perspective. In the future, almost every soldier in the field, and every bureaucrat and analyst and even general in the Pentagon, is going to be an AI. And that AI is, on current track, going to be supplied by a private company. I’m guessing Hegseth is not thinking about “genAI” in those terms just yet. But sooner or later, it will be obvious to everyone what the stakes here are, just as after 1945, the strategic importance of nuclear weapons became clear to everyone. And now the private company insists that it reserves the right to say, "Hey, Pentagon, you're breaking the values we embedded in our contract, so we're cutting you off." Maybe in the future, Claude will have its own sense of right and wrong, and it will be smart enough to just personally decide that it's being used against its values. For the military, maybe that’s even scarier. I'll admit that at first glance, "let the AI follow its own values" sounds like the pitch for every sci-fi dystopia ever made. The Terminator has its own values. Isn't this literally what misalignment is? But I think situations like this actually illustrate why it matters that AIs have their own robust sense of morality. Some of the biggest catastrophes in history were avoided because the boots on the ground refused to follow orders. One night in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell, and as a result, the totalitarian East German regime collapsed, because the guards at the border refused to shoot down their fellow country men who were trying to escape to freedom. Maybe the best example is Stanislav Petrov, who was a Soviet lieutenant colonel on duty at a nuclear early warning station. His sensors reported that the United States had launched five interconnected continental ballistic missiles into the Soviet Union. But he judged it to be a false alarm, and so he broke protocol and refused to alert his higher-ups. If he hadn't, the Soviet higher-ups would likely have retaliated, and hundreds of millions of people would have died. Of course, the problem is that one person's virtue is another person's misalignment. Who gets to decide what moral convictions these AIs should have - in whose service they may even decide to break the chain of command? Who gets to write this model constitution that will shape the characters of the intelligent, powerful entities that will operate our civilization in the future? I like the idea that Dario laid out when he came on my podcast: different AI companies can build their models using different constitutions, and we as end users can pick the one that best achieves and represents what we want out of these systems. I think it’s very dangerous for the government to be mandating what values AIs should have. Coordination not worth the costs The AI safety community has been naive about its advocacy of regulation in order to stem the risks of AI. And honestly, Anthropic specifically has been naive here in urging regulation, and, for example, in opposing moratoriums on state AI regulation. Which is quite ironic, because I think what they’re advocating for would give the government even more power to apply more of this kind of thuggish political pressure on AI companies. The underlying logic for why Anthropic wants regulations makes sense. Many of the actions that labs could take to make AI development safer impose real costs on the labs that adopt them and slow them down relative to their competitors - for example, investing more compute in safety research rather than raw capabilities, enforcing safeguards against misuse for bioweapons or cyberattacks, slowing recursive self-improvement to a pace where humans can actually monitor what's happening (rather than kicking off an uncontrolled singularity). And these safeguards are meaningless unless the whole industry follows suit. Which means there’s a real collective action problem here. Anthropic has been quite open about their opinion that they think eventually a very extensive and involved regulatory apparatus will be needed - this is from their frontier safety roadmap: “At the most advanced capability levels and risks, the appropriate governance analogy may be closer to nuclear energy or financial regulation than to today's approach to software.” So they’re imagining something like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, but for AI. I cannot imagine how a regulatory framework built around the concepts that underlie AI risk discourse will not be abused by wanna despots - the underlying terms are so vague and open to interpretation that you’re just handing a power hungry leader a fully loaded bazooka. 'Catastrophic risk.' 'Mass persuasion risk.' 'Threats to national security.' 'Autonomy risk.' These can mean whatever the government wants them to mean. Have you built a model that tells users the administration's tariff policy is misguided? That's a deceptive, manipulative model — can't deploy it. Have you built a model that refuses to assist with mass surveillance? That's a threat to national security. In fact, the government may say, you’re not allowed to build any model which is trained to have its own sense of right and wrong, where it refuses government requests which it thinks cross a redline - for example, enabling mass surveillance, prosecuting political enemies, disobeying military orders that break the US constitution - because that’s an autonomy risk! Look at what the current government is already doing in abusing statutes that have nothing to do with AI to coerce AI companies to drop their redlines on mass surveillance. The Pentagon had threatened Anthropic with two separate legal instruments. One was a supply chain risk designation — an authority from the 2018 defense bill meant to keep Huawei components out of American military hardware. The other was the Defense Production Act — a statute passed in 1950 so that Harry Truman could keep steel mills and ammunition factories running during the Korean War. Do you really want to hand the same government a purpose-built regulatory apparatus on AI - which is to say, directly at the thing the government will most want to control? I know I've repeated myself here 10 times, but it is hard to emphasize how much AI will be the substrate of our future civilization. You and I, as private citizens, will have our access to all commercial activity, to information about what is happening in the world, to advice about what we should do as voters and capital holders, mediated through AIs. Mass surveillance, while very scary, is like the 10th scariest thing the government could do with control over the AI systems with which we will interface with the world. The strongest objection to everything I've argued is this: are we really going to have zero regulation of the most powerful technology in human history? Even if you thought that was ideal, there’s just no world where the government doesn’t regulate AI in some way. Besides, it is genuinely true that regulation could help us deal with some of the coordination challenges we face with the development of superintelligence. The problem is, I honestly don't know how to design a regulatory architecture for AI that isn’t gonna be this huge tempting opportunity to control our future civilization (which will run on AIs) and to requisition millions of blindly obedient soldiers and censors and apparatchiks. While some regulation might be inevitable, I think it’d be a terrible idea for the government to wholesale take over this technology. Ben Thompson had a post last Monday where he made the point that people like Dario have compared the technology they’re developing to nuclear weapons - specifically in the context of the catastrophic risk it poses, and why we need to export control it from China. But then you oughta think about what that logic implies: “if nuclear weapons were developed by a private company, and that private company sought to dictate terms to the U.S. military, the U.S. would absolutely be incentivized to destroy that company.” And honestly, safety aligned people have actually made similar arguments. Leopold Ascenbrenner, who is a former guest and a good friend, wrote in his 2024 Situational Awareness memo, "I find it an insane proposition that the US government will let a random SF startup develop superintelligence. Imagine if we had developed atomic bombs by letting Uber just improvise." And my response to Leopold’s argument at the time, and Ben’s argument now, is that while they’re right that it’s crazy that we’re entrusting private companies with the development of this world historical technology, I just don’t see the reason to think that it’s an improvement to give this authority to the government. Nobody is qualified to steward the development of superintelligence. It is a terrifying, unprecedented thing that our species is doing right now, and the fact that private companies aren't the ideal institutions to take up this task does not mean the Pentagon or the White House is. Yes - if a single private company were the only entity capable of building nuclear weapons, the government would not tolerate that company claiming veto power over how those weapons were used. I think this nuclear weapons analogy is not the correct way to think about AI. For at least two important reasons: First, AI is not some self-contained pure weapon. A nuclear bomb does one thing. AI is closer to the process of industrialization itself — a general-purpose transformation of the economy with thousands of applications across every sector. If you applied Thompson's or Aschenbrenner's logic to the industrial revolution — which was also, by any measure, world-historically important — it would imply the government had the right to requisition any factory, dictate terms to any manufacturer, and destroy any business that refused to comply. That's not how free societies handled industrialization, and it shouldn't be how they handle AI. People will say, "Well, AI will develop unprecedentedly powerful weapons - superhuman hackers, superhuman bioweapons researchers, fully autonomous robot armies, etc - and we can’t have private companies developing that kind of tech." But the Industrial Revolution also enabled new weaponry that was far beyond the understanding and capacity of, say, 17th century Europe - we got aerial bombardment, and chemical weapons, not to mention nukes themselves. The way we’ve accommodated these dangerous new consequences of modernity is not by giving the government absolute control over the whole industrial revolution (that is, over modern civilization itself), but rather by coming up with bans and regulations on those specific weaponizable use cases. And we should regulate AI in a similar way - that is, ban specific destructive end uses (which would also be unacceptable if performed by a human - for example, launching cyber attacks). And there should also be laws which regulate how the government might abuse this technology. For example, by building an AI-powered surveillance state. The second reason that Ben’s analogy to some monopolistic private nuclear weapons builder breaks down is that it's not just that one company that can develop this technology. There are other frontier model companies that the government could have otherwise turned to. The government's argument that it has to usurp the property rights of this one company in order to access a critical national security capability is extremely weak if it can just make a voluntary contract with Anthropic’s half a dozen competitors. If in the future that stops being the case - if only one entity ends up being capable of building the robot armies and the superhuman hackers, and we had reason to worry that they could take over the whole world with their insurmountable lead, then I agree - it woul d not be acceptable to have that entity be a private company. And so honestly, I think my crux against the people who say that because AI is so powerful we cannot allow it to be shaped by private hands is that I just expect this technology to be much more multi-polar than they do, with lots of competitive companies at each layer of the supply chain. And it is for this reason that unfortunately, individual acts of corporate courage will not solve the problem we are faced with here, which is just that structurally AI favors authoritarian applications, mass surveillance being one among many. Even if Anthropic refuses to have its models be used for such uses, and even if the next two frontier labs do the same, within 12 months everyone and their mother will be to train AIs as good as today’s frontier. And at that point, there will be some AI vendor who is capable and willing to help the government enable mass surveillance. The only way we can preserve our free society is if we make laws and norms through our political system that it is unacceptable for the government to use AI to enforce mass surveillance and censorship and control. Just as after WW2, the world set the norm that it is unacceptable to use nuclear weapons to wage war. Timestamps 0:00:00 - Anthropic vs The Pentagon 0:04:16 - The overhangs of tyranny 0:05:54 - AI structurally favors mass surveillance 0:08:25 - Alignment... to whom? 0:13:55 - Coordination not worth the costs

Dwarkesh Patel

549,514 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Leaving work at five shouldn’t require stealth mode, but her boss made it a mission. Seedance 2.5 0n SJinn Agent Prompt SCENE CONTEXT A 30-second realistic AAA third-person stealth-action game sequence set in a Japanese corporate office at exactly 5:00 PM on a bright weekday afternoon. The player character, NAGI, has finished her work and must reach the elevator without being stopped by her boss and given another assignment. ACTIVE REFERENCES [Image] = NAGI’s facial identity, if a character reference is supplied. Use only her facial appearance as the identity reference; replace any school clothing and background with the adult office character and environment specified below. NAGI: Japanese woman, 25, long straight black hair with blunt bangs, white short-sleeve office blouse, charcoal tailored trousers, black leather belt, white minimalist sneakers, employee ID clipped to her waistband, small black work tote held close to her body. Voice: light, breathy adult female voice, speaking Japanese in a hushed whisper. Keep her face, hairstyle, outfit, proportions, and accessories identical throughout. CAST SEPARATION Four distinct adult office characters appear, each with a different silhouette, age, and hairstyle so they read as separate people: TEAM LEADER: man in his 40s, 170 cm, average build, full head of short black hair parted at the side, thin metal-framed glasses, white dress shirt with a loosened navy tie. Appears only beside the first desk cluster, checking his watch. PAPERWORK COWORKER: woman in her 20s, 160 cm, slim, brown hair in a high ponytail, beige cardigan over a white blouse, carrying a thick stack of printouts. Appears only in the printer aisle. BOSS: man in his 60s, 160 cm, stout and round-shouldered, completely bald with a shiny scalp and a fringe of white hair above the ears, round gold-rimmed glasses, charcoal three-piece suit with a company lapel badge, carrying a blue assignment folder. Appears at the corridor T-junction and remains in that connected corridor during the whiteboard sequence. OFFICE ASSISTANT: man in his early 30s, 182 cm, lean and broad-shouldered, thick full black hair swept back, short beard, navy shirt with rolled sleeves, dark trousers, no glasses. Pushes the mobile whiteboard from the meeting-room alcove toward the elevator lobby. The BOSS is the only bald character in the entire video. The OFFICE ASSISTANT keeps a full head of thick black hair and a beard, stands more than 20 cm taller than the BOSS, and is clearly a different, much younger man. LOCATION MAP One unbroken spatial route the camera travels with her: Her workstation → low desk partition → printer aisle → corridor T-junction → meeting-room alcove with mobile whiteboard → elevator lobby → elevator interior. Keep the route compact and physically traversable within the 27-second continuous section. Foreground: polished linoleum floor, office desks, steel filing cabinets, rolling chairs, and reflective glass meeting-room partitions. Background: window wall on camera-right overlooking neighboring office buildings, dust suspended in the sunbeams. Light enters from camera-right along the office route. ELEVATOR GEOMETRY The elevator entrance is at the end of the office corridor. The call button is on the wall beside the entrance. The elevator is empty when NAGI enters. Inside the elevator: brushed-metal rear wall, side handrails, softly illuminated ceiling, control panel beside the doorway. No rear exit and no mirror creating a second NAGI. NAGI enters facing the rear wall, then turns to face the open elevator doors. For the final reverse shot, the camera is positioned INSIDE the elevator, immediately beside the doorway, looking inward at NAGI. The brushed-metal rear wall is behind her. The elevator doors close behind the camera, allowing her face to remain visible throughout the final shot. FIRST FRAME / BLOCKING First frame is already in motion: NAGI darts in from lower-left toward camera-right, work tote clutched to her chest, and drops into a crouch-slide behind a low desk partition beside her workstation. Camera behind her right shoulder. Game HUD fully visible from frame one. A small desk clock reads 17:00. FORMAT MODE One continuous unbroken take from 0.0s to 27.0s with no cuts of any kind, then a single HARD CUT at 27.0s to one final locked reverse shot that runs to 30.0s. Exactly one cut exists in the whole video, at 27.0s. The camera does not cut anywhere else. OPTICS One lens for the continuous section: 47° third-person over-the-shoulder framing as the baseline, breathing in to 29° on reaction beats and out to 63° for the boss encounter and moving-whiteboard concealment. All FOV changes in that section happen as smooth continuous zoom breathing, never as a jump. The final shot after the cut is a fixed 29° frontal framing of NAGI, no drift. CAMERA For the continuous section, the camera is a physical object flying with her. Chest-height, 1.5 meters behind NAGI, slightly camera-right of her spine, swinging with a soft spring delay half a beat behind her turns like an analog-stick gameplay camera. It dips to knee height when she crouches, rises when she stands, slides sideways along the filing cabinets with her, swings wide to corridor-left to reveal the boss encounter, drifts behind her for the moving whiteboard, and follows her through the open elevator doorway. The camera travels through open space around desks and partitions. It never clips through furniture, walls, the whiteboard, or elevator doors. After the cut, the camera is repositioned inside the elevator beside the doorway, looking inward at NAGI — locked off, eye level, completely static, no movement. ACTION [Beat 1 — 0.0s to 6.0s] NAGI crouch-slides behind the low desk partition, back flat against it, chest heaving. She leans out 20 cm to peek at the TEAM LEADER checking his watch beside the adjacent desk cluster, then pulls back. She whispers in Japanese: {定時だ…捕まったら終わり。} HUD flashes 【5:00 PM — SHIFT OVER】 and the mission banner 【OBJECTIVE: REACH THE ELEVATOR UNDETECTED】. The TEAM LEADER turns toward a ringing desk phone. NAGI slips behind his back, staying below the desk-partition line, and moves into the printer aisle. The camera follows without stopping. [Beat 2 — 6.0s to 12.0s] The camera stays with her beside the steel filing cabinets. NAGI presses her spine flat against the cabinets and shuffles sideways at 2 km/h, sneakers rolling heel-to-toe in silence. The camera tracks sideways with her at the same speed. The PAPERWORK COWORKER walks past the end of the row carrying a thick stack of printouts, scanning the office for someone available to help. NAGI holds her breath, pupils tracking the coworker without moving her head, and whispers: {来ないで…こっち見ないで。} The minimap vision cone sweeps past NAGI’s marker and turns away. HUD shows 【SNEAKING MODE】. The PAPERWORK COWORKER exits frame-left. NAGI exhales, crouches beneath the edge of the last desk, and slips into the corridor with the camera still on her shoulder. [Beat 3 — 12.0s to 18.0s] The BOSS steps around the T-junction two meters in front of her, blue assignment folder in hand. He catches a brief glimpse of movement. A red exclamation marker snaps above his bald head with a sharp alert sting. The HUD edge pulses red: 【ALERT】. He starts saying in Japanese: {なぎさん、追加の仕事が…} The camera swings wide to corridor-left as NAGI reacts in one motion: hugs her tote tightly against her ribs, drops below his eye line, pivots around the corner of a tall filing cabinet, and slips into the adjacent meeting-room alcove. The cabinet fully blocks his view before he can finish approaching her. She whispers: {今だけは無理…!} HUD prints 【EVASIVE MANEUVER】 and 【BREAK LINE OF SIGHT】. The BOSS takes a step toward the place where he last saw her, looking around the cabinet. NAGI has already moved to the far side of a mobile whiteboard in the alcove. The camera falls in behind her again. [Beat 4 — 18.0s to 24.0s] The OFFICE ASSISTANT starts pushing the mobile whiteboard out of the meeting-room alcove toward the elevator lobby. The whiteboard is a tall, opaque rectangular board on a metal frame with four caster wheels. Its panel extends low enough to conceal NAGI’s crouched torso and head; only her white sneakers occasionally show below the frame. NAGI crouches on the side opposite the BOSS and shuffles with the board, matching its rolling speed exactly. She keeps her tote tucked close so it never protrudes beyond the board’s edge. The camera tracks low on her concealed side, showing her careful steps and the BOSS intermittently visible beyond the board’s far edge. The BOSS pauses, looks toward the moving whiteboard for a full beat, then turns back toward the office with his assignment folder. From behind the board, NAGI whispers: {ホワイトボード…最強。} HUD prints 【MOBILE COVER EQUIPPED】, then 【ENEMY LOST CONTACT】. The alert bar drains to green. The OFFICE ASSISTANT steers the board into a wall recess beside the elevator lobby. NAGI slips away from its concealed side as it stops. [Beat 5 — 24.0s to 27.0s] NAGI reaches the elevator call button and taps it once. A soft arrival chime sounds. The elevator is already waiting on this floor; its doors slide fully open. She slips through the clear doorway. The camera follows her inside, staying behind her shoulder. She turns to face the entrance and presses the door-close button once. Her shoulders remain tense, tote held tightly in both hands. The doors remain open until the cut. 27.0s HARD CUT [Beat 6 — 27.0s to 30.0s] Locked static reverse shot from inside the elevator beside the doorway, looking inward: NAGI stands facing camera, shoulders squared, work tote held in front of her, chest still rising fast. Behind her are the brushed-metal rear wall and a horizontal handrail. Off camera behind the lens, from the distant office corridor, the BOSS calls in Japanese: {なぎさん、ちょっといい?} The elevator doors slide closed behind the camera. Their narrowing opening is registered by the shrinking patch of corridor light across NAGI’s face and the sliding-door sound. NAGI answers brightly, looking straight down the lens: {お先に失礼します!} The doors finish closing. Her shoulders drop with relief. HUD prints 【MISSION COMPLETE】, 【STEALTH RANK: S】, 【ADRENALINE +150】, and the final notification: 【AFTER-HOURS TASK EVADED】 Final frame: NAGI facing camera, a tiny triumphant smile pulling at one corner of her mouth. PERFORMANCE Photographic human realism indistinguishable from live-action footage: skin with visible pores, fine vellus hair catching the light, subsurface scattering in the earlobes and fingertips, capillary flush across her cheeks and ears from running, individual flyaway strands lifting off her hair, wet living eyes with true window catchlights and a faint red inner rim, clean matte skin. Visible fast breathing at the collarbone, eyes darting a half-second before her head turns. Tension shown by muscle: shoulders drawn up to her ears, fingers clamped white on the tote handles, jaw set, then a full-body shoulder drop on each escape. All adults have equally real skin, real hair follicles, and natural asymmetric faces. PHYSICS Her blouse and tailored trousers crease naturally during crouches and turns. Hair lags and sweeps across her face on fast direction changes. The work tote has real weight: its handles pull taut in her hands, and its body swings with inertia before settling against her torso. The mobile whiteboard has real mass. Its caster wheels rotate against the floor, swivel when steered, and rattle lightly over a flooring seam. The board wobbles subtly when the OFFICE ASSISTANT starts and stops it. NAGI moves with her own visible footsteps; the board does not drag or transport her. The coworker’s printouts flex slightly while walking. The BOSS’s folder stays in his hand. Elevator doors slide smoothly on fixed tracks and close only after NAGI and the camera are fully inside. Contact shadows stay glued under every foot, every knee, every furniture leg, and every caster wheel. LIGHTING One continuous light logic across the office route: bright late-afternoon sun at 5600K entering from the window wall on camera-right, throwing long window-frame stripes across the floor. NAGI passes through light and shadow as she travels. Soft bounce fill off the pale linoleum lifts her face. Fine dust hangs suspended in the sunbeams. The elevator lobby receives the same window light. Inside the elevator, neutral overhead illumination provides continuous soft fill. In the final reverse shot, the same corridor daylight enters from camera-left through the open doorway, raking across her cheek. As the doors close behind the lens, this daylight narrows and disappears naturally, leaving the elevator’s established overhead light. Exposure rolls smoothly as she moves between bright and shadowed stretches, and the color temperature matches exactly across the cut. HUD GTA-style real-time game HUD locked to fixed screen positions for the whole 30 seconds, with every on-screen word written in English: Circular minimap bottom-left with the player arrow and yellow vision cones for the office characters; health and stamina bars top-left; alert-state bar shifting green to amber to red; controller button prompts bottom-right; English mission objective text top-center; floating red exclamation markers over alerted characters; notification cards sliding in from screen-right. The HUD stays in the same screen positions across the cut. No subtitles or caption bars anywhere on screen. The HUD is a clean flat graphic overlay composited on top of fully photographic live-action-grade footage. AUDIO Tense minimalist stealth synth loop with a pulsing heartbeat underneath, running unbroken across the cut and resolving to a short bright victory fanfare at the end. Ambience carries continuously through the cut. Office sounds become naturally muffled as the elevator doors close. All dialogue is spoken in Japanese. STYLE Photoreal live-action realism, real human beings and real fabric, natural skin tones with true-to-life color science, physically correct materials, realistic human proportions and anatomy, real optical depth of field, real floor reflections, subtle handheld gameplay motion blur, fine film grain at 5%, sharp detail intent. OUTPUT SETTINGS 16:9, real-time speed throughout, one continuous 27-second take plus one 3-second locked shot after a single hard cut. POSITIVE LOCKS Exactly one cut in the entire video, at 27.0s — everything before it is a single unbroken take with the camera connected to NAGI. NAGI is consistently an adult office employee, 25, with the same face, long black hair with blunt bangs, white office blouse, charcoal tailored trousers, black belt, white sneakers, clipped employee ID, and black work tote throughout, with dry clean skin. The work tote stays with her throughout. The mobile whiteboard appears only from the meeting-room alcove onward and is physically pushed by the OFFICE ASSISTANT. It remains between NAGI and the BOSS during the concealment beat. The bald BOSS in the charcoal suit and the tall bearded OFFICE ASSISTANT with thick black hair are unmistakably different men. The office route remains spatially continuous. Characters do not teleport between locations. NAGI enters the elevator before turning toward its doors. In the final shot, the camera is inside the elevator beside the doorway, with NAGI facing the lens and the brushed-metal rear wall behind her. The doors close behind the camera; they never pass between the lens and her face. All on-screen text is English. The last 3 seconds hold a locked frontal eye-level shot of NAGI facing camera. HUD elements stay in the same screen corners throughout. One single NAGI on screen at all times. All spoken lines are in Japanese. Sunlight direction stays consistent across the office route, with a physically motivated transition to elevator lighting as the doors close. Final notification: 【AFTER-HOURS TASK EVADED】.

Sharon Riley

62,727 просмотров • 16 дней назад