Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Random 90s at bats: Dennis Rasmussen vs Barry Larkin, Eric Davis & Chris Sabo (September 21, 1990). If you’re a Reds fan, you’ll appreciate these…

Stirrups Now!

60,245 subscribers

10,439 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

You know you needed to see back-to-back-to-back homers from Chris Sabo, Barry Larkin, and Eric Davis in 1990.

You know you needed to see back-to-back-to-back homers from Chris Sabo, Barry Larkin, and Eric Davis in 1990.

Chad Dotson

80,902 views • 1 year ago

Random early 90s at bats (David Cone vs Bobby Bonilla & Barry Bonds in 1990).

Random early 90s at bats (David Cone vs Bobby Bonilla & Barry Bonds in 1990).

Stirrups Now!

11,483 views • 2 months ago

Random 90s at bats: Jeff Robinson vs Keith Hernandez & Chris James (April 12, 1990).

Random 90s at bats: Jeff Robinson vs Keith Hernandez & Chris James (April 12, 1990).

Stirrups Now!

32,937 views • 5 months ago

Random 90s at bats: Nolan Ryan vs Deion Sanders, Steve Sax & Oscar Ozacar (July 25, 1990).

Random 90s at bats: Nolan Ryan vs Deion Sanders, Steve Sax & Oscar Ozacar (July 25, 1990).

Stirrups Now!

18,286 views • 5 months ago

Random 90s at bats: Bob Feller vs Al Kaline & Willie Horton (August 18, 1990 Old Timers Game).

Random 90s at bats: Bob Feller vs Al Kaline & Willie Horton (August 18, 1990 Old Timers Game).

Stirrups Now!

46,677 views • 4 months ago

Extended Random 90s at bats: Nolan Ryan vs Don Mattingly, Mel Hall, Dave Winfield & Jesse Barfield faces some extraordinary pitches. (April 20, 1990). Tom Seaver & George W Bush on the call…

Extended Random 90s at bats: Nolan Ryan vs Don Mattingly, Mel Hall, Dave Winfield & Jesse Barfield faces some extraordinary pitches. (April 20, 1990). Tom Seaver & George W Bush on the call…

Stirrups Now!

28,080 views • 4 months ago

This was special. Showing Barry Larkin our new Baseball United Ballpark - and the field we named after him - for the first time. We had all the lights off when he rolled up. Lark said “man, y’all play in the dark here in the desert or what?!” lol Then John Miedreich and I walked Lark out to shortstop, and I started asking him where he was when the Cincinnati Reds made the final out to win the 1990 World Series vs the Athletics. In true Lark fashion, he started telling the most epic story about those final moments. I asked him where exactly he was when Todd Benzinger caught the final out (a foul ball just off first base). Lark walked over to that exact spot, and raised his arms up. And then I put my arms around him, and yelled at Rick Shaikh and Joshua Varughese to flip on the lights. And we lit up Barry Larkin Field for Barry Larkin. 🥹 It was awesome. These are the moments that make all the work worth it. 🙏❤️⚾️⛏️ Musco Lighting National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum ⚾

This was special. Showing Barry Larkin our new Baseball United Ballpark - and the field we named after him - for the first time. We had all the lights off when he rolled up. Lark said “man, y’all play in the dark here in the desert or what?!” lol Then John Miedreich and I walked Lark out to shortstop, and I started asking him where he was when the Cincinnati Reds made the final out to win the 1990 World Series vs the Athletics. In true Lark fashion, he started telling the most epic story about those final moments. I asked him where exactly he was when Todd Benzinger caught the final out (a foul ball just off first base). Lark walked over to that exact spot, and raised his arms up. And then I put my arms around him, and yelled at Rick Shaikh and Joshua Varughese to flip on the lights. And we lit up Barry Larkin Field for Barry Larkin. 🥹 It was awesome. These are the moments that make all the work worth it. 🙏❤️⚾️⛏️ Musco Lighting National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum ⚾

Kash Shaikh

21,201 views • 1 year ago

a16z co-founder Ben Horowitz: “Don’t follow your passion” Ben gives this advice to the Columbia University class of 2015: “Don’t follow your passion. Now I know you’re probably thinking: ‘That’s a really dumb idea because if you poll 1,000 people who are successful, they’ll all say they love what they do. And so the broad conclusion of the world is that if you do what you love, then you’ll be successful.’ But we’re engineers, so we know that might be true. It also might be the case that if you’re successful, you love what you do — you just love being successful, everybody loves you, it’s awesome. So which one is it?” He continues: “The first tricky thing about passions is they’re hard to prioritize. Are you more passionate about math or engineering? Are you more passionate about history or literature? Are you more passionate about video games or K-pop? These are tough decisions. How do you even know? On the other hand, what are you good at? Are you better at math or writing? That’s a much easier thing to figure out. The second thing that’s tricky if you’re going forward in time with this ‘follow your passion’ idea is that what you’re passionate about at 21 is not necessarily what you’re going to be passionate about at 40. Now this is true for boyfriends, as well as career choices. The third issue with following your passion is that you’re not necessarily good at your passion. Has anybody ever watched American Idol? So you know what I’m talking about. Just because you love singing doesn’t mean you should be a professional singer. And then finally, and most importantly, following your passion is a very ‘me-centered’ view of the world. And when you go through life, what you’ll find is that what you take out of the world — money, cars, stuff, accolades — is much less important than what you put into the world. And so my recommendation would be to follow your contribution. Find the thing that you’re great at, put that into the world, contribute to others, help the world be better. That is the thing to follow.” Video source: a16z (2015)

a16z co-founder Ben Horowitz: “Don’t follow your passion” Ben gives this advice to the Columbia University class of 2015: “Don’t follow your passion. Now I know you’re probably thinking: ‘That’s a really dumb idea because if you poll 1,000 people who are successful, they’ll all say they love what they do. And so the broad conclusion of the world is that if you do what you love, then you’ll be successful.’ But we’re engineers, so we know that might be true. It also might be the case that if you’re successful, you love what you do — you just love being successful, everybody loves you, it’s awesome. So which one is it?” He continues: “The first tricky thing about passions is they’re hard to prioritize. Are you more passionate about math or engineering? Are you more passionate about history or literature? Are you more passionate about video games or K-pop? These are tough decisions. How do you even know? On the other hand, what are you good at? Are you better at math or writing? That’s a much easier thing to figure out. The second thing that’s tricky if you’re going forward in time with this ‘follow your passion’ idea is that what you’re passionate about at 21 is not necessarily what you’re going to be passionate about at 40. Now this is true for boyfriends, as well as career choices. The third issue with following your passion is that you’re not necessarily good at your passion. Has anybody ever watched American Idol? So you know what I’m talking about. Just because you love singing doesn’t mean you should be a professional singer. And then finally, and most importantly, following your passion is a very ‘me-centered’ view of the world. And when you go through life, what you’ll find is that what you take out of the world — money, cars, stuff, accolades — is much less important than what you put into the world. And so my recommendation would be to follow your contribution. Find the thing that you’re great at, put that into the world, contribute to others, help the world be better. That is the thing to follow.” Video source: a16z (2015)

Startup Archive

358,132 views • 9 months ago

Finally got around to fitting the NAKAMOTO MINING ™ ⛏️ $kas fan shroud on my KS3. As most ASIC miners know, these things are LOUD. They’re not something you can take home, plug in, and leave humming away without destroying everyone else’s sanity! Enter fan shrouds. They are game-changers, allowing you to take your existing miner, attach a shroud and an 8” fan on the end, and enjoy near silence. There is a range of different fans you can buy, but the one I usually go for is the AC Infinity S8. Cheaper options are available, so it’s best to research what works best for your budget. Lastly, you’ll need fan simulators, which are small devices that trick the miner into thinking the four large fans are still attached. This is important because, by default, the miner will not start if it doesn’t detect them. Depending on the model of miner you’re using, you’ll need to research what is most appropriate for you (more on that later…). Parts: 1x Fan Shroud 1x 8" Fan 4x Fan Simulator's 1. Unscrew the four large fans. 2. Remove the top cover. Disconnect the four large fans and connect your fan simulators. 3. Screw the rear/front shrouds into the existing holes on the ASIC using the provided screws. 4. Connect the 8” fan and use the metal clamp to secure the shroud onto the fan. (I usually place the fan at the rear of the unit in a ‘push’ configuration.) 5. Voila! I would honestly rate this a 2 out of 10 on the difficulty scale and encourage anyone with an ASIC running at home to consider this modification. It’s especially worthwhile because it is fully reversible if needed. Note: My earlier comment on choosing a fan simulator based on compatibility was a bit of foreshadowing, as once I booted up my KS3, I discovered that neither of the fan simulators I had on hand (No brand simulator and Njord Cloudline Simulator) worked with my miner. If anyone from the Pivotal Pleb Tech team can confirm if your NJORD-CL-V1-r1.0.0 is compatible with Bitmain's KS3, that would be awesome as I love your product. I have one on all my other ASIC miners! 😁 Anyway, in the meantime I'll have to revert today's install but as you can see - this really isn't difficult so if you're on the fence about doing this to your miner, I would encourage you to go for it!

Luke Dunshea

11,996 views • 2 years ago

Victor Davis Hanson: The ‘Egregious’ Pollsters’ Bias Against Trump, Explained Mainstream media would have you believe that Trump’s first 100 days were a failure—despite securing the border and strong economic gains. Victor Davis Hanson breaks down the polling regarding Donald Trump’s early 2025 presidency on today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” and asks the question: Were pollsters reflecting public opinion, or manipulating it? “There were analyses after each of the 2016, the 2020, and the 2024 elections about the accuracy of polls, post facto, of the election. And we learned that they were way off in 2016. They said they had learned their lessons. “They were way off in 2020. They said they learned their lesson. And they were way off in 2024. And why are they way off? Because liberal pollsters—and that's the majority of people who do these surveys—believe that if they create artificial leads for their Democratic candidates, it creates greater fundraising and momentum. “ If you look at the polls that were the most accurate—Mark Penn was very accurate. He's a Democratic pollster. But especially, the Rasmussen Reports and InsiderAdvantage Polling and The Trafalgar Group… They have Trump ahead by anywhere from two to three points after 100 days.” 00:00 Introduction: Pollsters' Bias in Trump's First 100 Days 01:15 Economic Success vs. Negative Headlines 01:53 Manipulation Tactics in Polling 02:29 Inaccuracies in Polling Over the Years 03:21 The Most Egregious Polls 04:17 Revealing the Truth Behind Polls 05:07 Accurate Polls and Media Bias 06:18 Conclusion and Call to Action 👉Don’t miss out on Victor’s latest videos by subscribing to The Daily Signal today. You’ll be notified every time a new piece of content drops: 👉If you can’t get enough of Victor Davis Hanson from The Daily Signal, subscribe to his official YouTube channel: 👉He’s also the host of “The Victor Davis Hanson Show,” available wherever you prefer to watch or listen. Links to the show and exclusive content are available on his website: The Daily Signal cannot continue to tell stories, like this one, without the support of our viewers:

Victor Davis Hanson: The ‘Egregious’ Pollsters’ Bias Against Trump, Explained Mainstream media would have you believe that Trump’s first 100 days were a failure—despite securing the border and strong economic gains. Victor Davis Hanson breaks down the polling regarding Donald Trump’s early 2025 presidency on today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” and asks the question: Were pollsters reflecting public opinion, or manipulating it? “There were analyses after each of the 2016, the 2020, and the 2024 elections about the accuracy of polls, post facto, of the election. And we learned that they were way off in 2016. They said they had learned their lessons. “They were way off in 2020. They said they learned their lesson. And they were way off in 2024. And why are they way off? Because liberal pollsters—and that's the majority of people who do these surveys—believe that if they create artificial leads for their Democratic candidates, it creates greater fundraising and momentum. “ If you look at the polls that were the most accurate—Mark Penn was very accurate. He's a Democratic pollster. But especially, the Rasmussen Reports and InsiderAdvantage Polling and The Trafalgar Group… They have Trump ahead by anywhere from two to three points after 100 days.” 00:00 Introduction: Pollsters' Bias in Trump's First 100 Days 01:15 Economic Success vs. Negative Headlines 01:53 Manipulation Tactics in Polling 02:29 Inaccuracies in Polling Over the Years 03:21 The Most Egregious Polls 04:17 Revealing the Truth Behind Polls 05:07 Accurate Polls and Media Bias 06:18 Conclusion and Call to Action 👉Don’t miss out on Victor’s latest videos by subscribing to The Daily Signal today. You’ll be notified every time a new piece of content drops: 👉If you can’t get enough of Victor Davis Hanson from The Daily Signal, subscribe to his official YouTube channel: 👉He’s also the host of “The Victor Davis Hanson Show,” available wherever you prefer to watch or listen. Links to the show and exclusive content are available on his website: The Daily Signal cannot continue to tell stories, like this one, without the support of our viewers:

The Daily Signal

144,483 views • 1 year ago

Stephen A. Smith is not taking President Trump calling him low IQ very well. He melted down on Chris Cuomo’s show over Trump’s attendance at the Knicks game — now openly blaming Trump if the Knicks lose the series. Cuomo was just awkwardly laughing as Smith spiraled. SMITH: “God help him if they lose this series!” “If they lose this series, it’s all his fault. It’s ALL HIS FAULT!” “I’m saying it on national TV, it’s his fault if they lose this series!” “I would say it about anybody. Obama, if you want a president, you shouldn’t be there. W Bush, Clinton, damnit, Reagan, George HW. I don’t give damn!” “If you’re the SITTING president causing that kind mayhem, you DO NOT come to garden, the congestion that exists in midtown Manhattan for an NBA finals game!” “You DON’T do it!” “And he did it, and that’s why New York Knicks lost.” “I don’t care what anybody says. I was at the game.” “I saw how these guys were, I saw how the crowd was, I saw how the momentum was compromised. I know what I’m talking about and he knows it too because he’s a sports fan.” “That’s why he came at me the way that he did because I caught him, because he’s wrong.” “He knows his behind should not have been at that game last night!” “Should have stayed his ass at the White House! That’s what he was supposed to do.”

Stephen A. Smith is not taking President Trump calling him low IQ very well. He melted down on Chris Cuomo’s show over Trump’s attendance at the Knicks game — now openly blaming Trump if the Knicks lose the series. Cuomo was just awkwardly laughing as Smith spiraled. SMITH: “God help him if they lose this series!” “If they lose this series, it’s all his fault. It’s ALL HIS FAULT!” “I’m saying it on national TV, it’s his fault if they lose this series!” “I would say it about anybody. Obama, if you want a president, you shouldn’t be there. W Bush, Clinton, damnit, Reagan, George HW. I don’t give damn!” “If you’re the SITTING president causing that kind mayhem, you DO NOT come to garden, the congestion that exists in midtown Manhattan for an NBA finals game!” “You DON’T do it!” “And he did it, and that’s why New York Knicks lost.” “I don’t care what anybody says. I was at the game.” “I saw how these guys were, I saw how the crowd was, I saw how the momentum was compromised. I know what I’m talking about and he knows it too because he’s a sports fan.” “That’s why he came at me the way that he did because I caught him, because he’s wrong.” “He knows his behind should not have been at that game last night!” “Should have stayed his ass at the White House! That’s what he was supposed to do.”

Overton

15,833 views • 3 months ago

Gilbert Arenas clowns the dunk contest between Michael Jordan and Dominique Wilkins and says the 80s was not the best era for basketball 👀 “You’re not gonna convince me 1980s, in middle of the cocaine era, no trainers, and yall try to tell me that’s the best era? Yall need to go on somewhere nobody trynna hear that…. If you really think this era stinks that bad, go watch the best dunk contest of a rival with MJ vs Wilkins. Go watch it today and let’s see if what you have in your brain, looks like that on the screen. You’re gonna sit there and think ‘f*cking high school kids dunking better than this right now’. That’s how far the game has evolved. You will look at this great dunk contest that elevated careers and you will say yeah, this is ass. One guy did the same dunk every round. I’m gonna windmill from the front, windmill from the side, the other side, throw off backboard, then windmill. It was a windmill factory. Go watch it and you’ll realize how outdated your brain has been to today’s game. We don’t appreciate what we’re watching. You got LeBron James who could be 1, 2 or 3 of all time and we talk about him like he’s the worst player to come through this game” (Via Gilbert Arenas)

Gilbert Arenas clowns the dunk contest between Michael Jordan and Dominique Wilkins and says the 80s was not the best era for basketball 👀 “You’re not gonna convince me 1980s, in middle of the cocaine era, no trainers, and yall try to tell me that’s the best era? Yall need to go on somewhere nobody trynna hear that…. If you really think this era stinks that bad, go watch the best dunk contest of a rival with MJ vs Wilkins. Go watch it today and let’s see if what you have in your brain, looks like that on the screen. You’re gonna sit there and think ‘f*cking high school kids dunking better than this right now’. That’s how far the game has evolved. You will look at this great dunk contest that elevated careers and you will say yeah, this is ass. One guy did the same dunk every round. I’m gonna windmill from the front, windmill from the side, the other side, throw off backboard, then windmill. It was a windmill factory. Go watch it and you’ll realize how outdated your brain has been to today’s game. We don’t appreciate what we’re watching. You got LeBron James who could be 1, 2 or 3 of all time and we talk about him like he’s the worst player to come through this game” (Via Gilbert Arenas)

Heat Central

75,131 views • 8 months ago

Victor Davis Hanson: The Trump Deranged “Experts” Were Wrong. Again. President Donald Trump’s track record flies in the face of conventional wisdom from so-called “experts”— but they will be the last to admit it. Since his second inauguration, the “experts” have been relentless in their mission to minimize the Trump administration’s efforts with the economy, immigration, Iran, and beyond. Meanwhile, the stock market has soared. There were ZERO illegal border crossings in May, according to CBP. Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was left severely damaged without the threat of war on the horizon. All this, thanks to the decisive and, at times controversial, actions taken by the Trump administration. Despite these verifiable results, Victor Davis Hanson argues that much of the elite resistance to Trump stems not from data, but from disdain. And that bias has blinded them to basic common sense. He breaks it down on this episode of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words.” “Donald Trump is pretty commonsensical. If you take a million people away that were working in the shadows at cheaper wages and hurting American job opportunities and you make countries that had asymmetrical tariffs and were responsible for a $1.1 trillion trade deficit and you can stop that and they still want entry into the American market, then you can have an economic renaissance. “You should try to shed your Trump Derangement Syndrome because it's really affecting your powers of judgment and analysis. And you're going to lose readers. You are so wedded to the idea that Donald Trump is going to destroy the United States because of your personal animus, you cannot see that most people have commonsense solutions.” 👉Don’t miss out on Victor’s latest videos by subscribing to The Daily Signal today. You’ll be notified every time a new piece of content drops: 👉If you can’t get enough of Victor Davis Hanson from The Daily Signal, subscribe to his official YouTube channel: 👉He’s also the host of “The Victor Davis Hanson Show,” available wherever you prefer to watch or listen. Links to the show and exclusive content are available on his website: 00:00 Questioning the Experts 00:29 Criticism of Trump: Reality vs. Perception 01:30 Iran Strikes: Media vs. Reality 04:02 Border Control: Trump's Approach 05:26 Tariffs and Economic Outcomes 06:34 Reflecting on the Experts' Accuracy

Victor Davis Hanson: The Trump Deranged “Experts” Were Wrong. Again. President Donald Trump’s track record flies in the face of conventional wisdom from so-called “experts”— but they will be the last to admit it. Since his second inauguration, the “experts” have been relentless in their mission to minimize the Trump administration’s efforts with the economy, immigration, Iran, and beyond. Meanwhile, the stock market has soared. There were ZERO illegal border crossings in May, according to CBP. Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was left severely damaged without the threat of war on the horizon. All this, thanks to the decisive and, at times controversial, actions taken by the Trump administration. Despite these verifiable results, Victor Davis Hanson argues that much of the elite resistance to Trump stems not from data, but from disdain. And that bias has blinded them to basic common sense. He breaks it down on this episode of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words.” “Donald Trump is pretty commonsensical. If you take a million people away that were working in the shadows at cheaper wages and hurting American job opportunities and you make countries that had asymmetrical tariffs and were responsible for a $1.1 trillion trade deficit and you can stop that and they still want entry into the American market, then you can have an economic renaissance. “You should try to shed your Trump Derangement Syndrome because it's really affecting your powers of judgment and analysis. And you're going to lose readers. You are so wedded to the idea that Donald Trump is going to destroy the United States because of your personal animus, you cannot see that most people have commonsense solutions.” 👉Don’t miss out on Victor’s latest videos by subscribing to The Daily Signal today. You’ll be notified every time a new piece of content drops: 👉If you can’t get enough of Victor Davis Hanson from The Daily Signal, subscribe to his official YouTube channel: 👉He’s also the host of “The Victor Davis Hanson Show,” available wherever you prefer to watch or listen. Links to the show and exclusive content are available on his website: 00:00 Questioning the Experts 00:29 Criticism of Trump: Reality vs. Perception 01:30 Iran Strikes: Media vs. Reality 04:02 Border Control: Trump's Approach 05:26 Tariffs and Economic Outcomes 06:34 Reflecting on the Experts' Accuracy

Daily Signal

486,637 views • 1 year ago

I can’t upload the actual video of this because Super Sport will take it down. But you can have a look. Look, this is what pisses me off: referee consistency. How many times does a referee have to tell a team to get on with it when they’re deliberately slowing the game down before actually penalising them? Karl Dickson told Manie Libbok repeatedly to get on with it. Pieter-Steph du Toit deliberately moved into Libbok’s kicking position, then took treatment there, preventing the game from restarting. You can listen to the video and hear Dickson telling Libbok to go and Libbok refusing. In my view, that is a clear penalty for time-wasting. A few years ago at Marvel Stadium, Mathieu Raynal penalised Bernard Foley and the Wallabies for delaying a penalty vs All Blacks. He didn’t give them anywhere near this much time. That is the consistency we want. And to South Africa: with all due respect, you are the best team in the world. You’re leading this Test. You’re double World Cup champions. You don’t need this shit. You came hard at Cam Roigard for allegedly acting in the last game, and the memes were everywhere. So how about holding your own players to the same standard? This isn’t banter. This is a rugby fan talking. South Africa has inspired generations of rugby fans, including me. When I was a kid, the All Blacks and Springboks were the benchmark. We looked up to these teams because they represented what rugby could be. That’s why this matters. There are kids watching these games and learning from what they see. Don’t teach them that deliberately slowing the game down or playing games with injuries is acceptable when you’re under pressure. You are far too good for this. If you lose, lose properly. Hold your heads high. You’re better than this, Springboks. Come on now ! #Springboks #Allblacks #Rugby #RSAvNZL 🇿🇦🇳🇿 | THE GREATEST RIVALRY TOUR

I can’t upload the actual video of this because Super Sport will take it down. But you can have a look. Look, this is what pisses me off: referee consistency. How many times does a referee have to tell a team to get on with it when they’re deliberately slowing the game down before actually penalising them? Karl Dickson told Manie Libbok repeatedly to get on with it. Pieter-Steph du Toit deliberately moved into Libbok’s kicking position, then took treatment there, preventing the game from restarting. You can listen to the video and hear Dickson telling Libbok to go and Libbok refusing. In my view, that is a clear penalty for time-wasting. A few years ago at Marvel Stadium, Mathieu Raynal penalised Bernard Foley and the Wallabies for delaying a penalty vs All Blacks. He didn’t give them anywhere near this much time. That is the consistency we want. And to South Africa: with all due respect, you are the best team in the world. You’re leading this Test. You’re double World Cup champions. You don’t need this shit. You came hard at Cam Roigard for allegedly acting in the last game, and the memes were everywhere. So how about holding your own players to the same standard? This isn’t banter. This is a rugby fan talking. South Africa has inspired generations of rugby fans, including me. When I was a kid, the All Blacks and Springboks were the benchmark. We looked up to these teams because they represented what rugby could be. That’s why this matters. There are kids watching these games and learning from what they see. Don’t teach them that deliberately slowing the game down or playing games with injuries is acceptable when you’re under pressure. You are far too good for this. If you lose, lose properly. Hold your heads high. You’re better than this, Springboks. Come on now ! #Springboks #Allblacks #Rugby #RSAvNZL 🇿🇦🇳🇿 | THE GREATEST RIVALRY TOUR

Chalyn.Rugby

41,876 views • 12 days ago

Qullamaggie on Big Revenue Growth Equals Big Moves “Well look, the longer time frame you have on your trades, the more you need to focus on fundamentals and not just momentum. And you want stocks, you know, if you’re gonna hold the stock for many months and even quarters. You know there needs to be a reason for the stock to go up rather than just random momentum. Like, shorter term swing trading, you can just use momentum. You don’t need any fundamentals. But you know, to catch a mover like this, you know something goes up several hundred percent in a short amount of time. You know you need fuel. The stock needs, uh, to have a reason to go up. And the fuel many times is earnings, big earnings and revenue growth, and obviously big volume. You know some of my biggest winners: Fastly, Livongo, those stocks. These stocks went up 200, 300% after my entry. And these had big, you know, they had a lot of fuel or rocket fuel. And it’s called earnings and revenue growth. Now Fastly doesn’t have any earnings, but it had, you know, pretty good revenue growth. Livongo has enormous revenue growth and even earnings growth. Like a lot of these stocks that have made big moves, like Fiverr again. Big revenue growth and now it’s getting earnings too. GSX too. This thing has very big earnings and revenue growth, even though a lot of, you know, people call it a fraud. But like, look at the numbers right. This is the reason the stock is up, or was up almost 1,000% uh, in less than a year. Is because of this, look at the revenue growth. These are the stocks that make big moves. So you know, I try to focus on stocks that have big earnings and revenue growth. Primarily revenue growth, they don’t need to have earnings, but earnings if they have earnings, that’s a good thing. W too, well W was a bit trickier, because it had a slow quarter here. But now like, look at the numbers: 300% Rev, EPS growth 84% revenue growth. These are the stocks that make big moves. Overstock, hundred and ten percent revenue growth last quarter, and the market sniffed it out. This is why the stock went up two thousand percent before the earnings report. And you, you know, that’s something. If you study the big movers over the past, you know, 10, 20 years, you’ll see that most of the big movers, not all of them, but most of them had big revenue and big earnings growth.”

Qullamaggie on Big Revenue Growth Equals Big Moves “Well look, the longer time frame you have on your trades, the more you need to focus on fundamentals and not just momentum. And you want stocks, you know, if you’re gonna hold the stock for many months and even quarters. You know there needs to be a reason for the stock to go up rather than just random momentum. Like, shorter term swing trading, you can just use momentum. You don’t need any fundamentals. But you know, to catch a mover like this, you know something goes up several hundred percent in a short amount of time. You know you need fuel. The stock needs, uh, to have a reason to go up. And the fuel many times is earnings, big earnings and revenue growth, and obviously big volume. You know some of my biggest winners: Fastly, Livongo, those stocks. These stocks went up 200, 300% after my entry. And these had big, you know, they had a lot of fuel or rocket fuel. And it’s called earnings and revenue growth. Now Fastly doesn’t have any earnings, but it had, you know, pretty good revenue growth. Livongo has enormous revenue growth and even earnings growth. Like a lot of these stocks that have made big moves, like Fiverr again. Big revenue growth and now it’s getting earnings too. GSX too. This thing has very big earnings and revenue growth, even though a lot of, you know, people call it a fraud. But like, look at the numbers right. This is the reason the stock is up, or was up almost 1,000% uh, in less than a year. Is because of this, look at the revenue growth. These are the stocks that make big moves. So you know, I try to focus on stocks that have big earnings and revenue growth. Primarily revenue growth, they don’t need to have earnings, but earnings if they have earnings, that’s a good thing. W too, well W was a bit trickier, because it had a slow quarter here. But now like, look at the numbers: 300% Rev, EPS growth 84% revenue growth. These are the stocks that make big moves. Overstock, hundred and ten percent revenue growth last quarter, and the market sniffed it out. This is why the stock went up two thousand percent before the earnings report. And you, you know, that’s something. If you study the big movers over the past, you know, 10, 20 years, you’ll see that most of the big movers, not all of them, but most of them had big revenue and big earnings growth.”

Lone

11,356 views • 2 months ago

Paul Verhoeven on whether the events that take place in "Total Recall" (1990) are real or just a dream: "It is both. To be honest, that’s what I want. I made the movie in a way that it would be true on both levels, and I spent a lot of time to get that. If you want a scientific explanation, you know, of course, in quantum mechanics there is a very interesting principle, the principle of uncertainty, Heisenberg’s principle. If you have a big object and if you try to measure the place of the object and the velocity of the object at the same time, the more precisely you measure velocity the less precise place gets. So that’s the principle. That means, of course, that there are different realities possible at the same moment. What I wanted to do in 'Total Recall' is to do a movie where both levels are true. I mean for me, of course, the film anyhow has to do with two realities, one being the reality of going as a secret agent to Mars and discovering that there is a problem, and solving the problem, which is starting the nuclear reactor and helping the guerrillas and destroying Cohaagen. The second level of the movie, of course, is that from the moment that he goes into the Rekall chair ‘til the end it’s a dream, and I tried to make that second level work throughout the whole movie. So there’s the dream level which starts when he gets into the chair and the thing is in his neck, and that would go throughout the whole movie, so in the next scene where they say, Oh, there’s a problem, there’s a big glitch here, that would be already the dream, of course. That’s where the dream starts. And the next scene where they are fighting and stuff would be part of his dream, convincing him that it is real, because there is a glitch but that would be part of the program. It would be built into the program to make him accept the fact that it’s real, but it’s a dream. If you look at the movie, if you haven’t seen it, or for the second time, you’ll see that the whole program that’s set up at the beginning when he goes to the Rekall office and he talks to this guy who sells him the program on Mars, you’ll see that he gets everything that he wants: he gets the trip to Mars, he gets the girl, the exotic girl, he ki!!s the bad guys, and he saves the entire planet. That’s what he does. And that’s basically the dream. Even halfway through the movie, you may remember, this other guy comes in, Dr. Edgemar, and tells him that he’s in a dream, that he’s still in the Rekall chair, and then Arnold says, “If I’m there, I can ki!! you.” And he puts a gun to his head and the guy says, “Sure, no problem for me, big problem for you, because you will be psychotic from now on because the walls of reality will fall apart. One moment you will be the savior of the rebel cause, the next moment you’ll be Cohaagen’s bosom buddy, but in the end—you will even have these strange fantasies about alien civilizations—but at the end you will be lobotomized.” And then if you see the movie, you realize that all these things happen. I mean he is lobotomized at the end. That’s why at the last shot, when they are so happy and kissing each other, it slowly fades to white, which for me meant, “OK, there he goes. That’s the end-that’s the dream—they lobotomized him.” And all the other things happened, he finds the alien civilization, he rescues the planet, he finds the good girl, he k!!ls the bad guys, but it’s a dream. Now, of course you can see it as a reality, too. So at the end of the movie, getting to white means either it’s a happy ending or he loses his brains . . . which is probably also a happy ending, I don’t know. That was basically what l wanted—that at the end there would be two possibilities, and they would be both true—for me they are both true—it’s not either one or the other. It’s not that either it’s a dream or it is a reality. It is a dream and it is a reality. And I think they’re both there." (Paul Verhoeven's interview with Chris Shea & Wade Jennings, 1992) P.S: On this day, 36 years ago, "Total Recall" (1990) premiered in Los Angeles, California, USA.

Paul Verhoeven on whether the events that take place in "Total Recall" (1990) are real or just a dream: "It is both. To be honest, that’s what I want. I made the movie in a way that it would be true on both levels, and I spent a lot of time to get that. If you want a scientific explanation, you know, of course, in quantum mechanics there is a very interesting principle, the principle of uncertainty, Heisenberg’s principle. If you have a big object and if you try to measure the place of the object and the velocity of the object at the same time, the more precisely you measure velocity the less precise place gets. So that’s the principle. That means, of course, that there are different realities possible at the same moment. What I wanted to do in 'Total Recall' is to do a movie where both levels are true. I mean for me, of course, the film anyhow has to do with two realities, one being the reality of going as a secret agent to Mars and discovering that there is a problem, and solving the problem, which is starting the nuclear reactor and helping the guerrillas and destroying Cohaagen. The second level of the movie, of course, is that from the moment that he goes into the Rekall chair ‘til the end it’s a dream, and I tried to make that second level work throughout the whole movie. So there’s the dream level which starts when he gets into the chair and the thing is in his neck, and that would go throughout the whole movie, so in the next scene where they say, Oh, there’s a problem, there’s a big glitch here, that would be already the dream, of course. That’s where the dream starts. And the next scene where they are fighting and stuff would be part of his dream, convincing him that it is real, because there is a glitch but that would be part of the program. It would be built into the program to make him accept the fact that it’s real, but it’s a dream. If you look at the movie, if you haven’t seen it, or for the second time, you’ll see that the whole program that’s set up at the beginning when he goes to the Rekall office and he talks to this guy who sells him the program on Mars, you’ll see that he gets everything that he wants: he gets the trip to Mars, he gets the girl, the exotic girl, he ki!!s the bad guys, and he saves the entire planet. That’s what he does. And that’s basically the dream. Even halfway through the movie, you may remember, this other guy comes in, Dr. Edgemar, and tells him that he’s in a dream, that he’s still in the Rekall chair, and then Arnold says, “If I’m there, I can ki!! you.” And he puts a gun to his head and the guy says, “Sure, no problem for me, big problem for you, because you will be psychotic from now on because the walls of reality will fall apart. One moment you will be the savior of the rebel cause, the next moment you’ll be Cohaagen’s bosom buddy, but in the end—you will even have these strange fantasies about alien civilizations—but at the end you will be lobotomized.” And then if you see the movie, you realize that all these things happen. I mean he is lobotomized at the end. That’s why at the last shot, when they are so happy and kissing each other, it slowly fades to white, which for me meant, “OK, there he goes. That’s the end-that’s the dream—they lobotomized him.” And all the other things happened, he finds the alien civilization, he rescues the planet, he finds the good girl, he k!!ls the bad guys, but it’s a dream. Now, of course you can see it as a reality, too. So at the end of the movie, getting to white means either it’s a happy ending or he loses his brains . . . which is probably also a happy ending, I don’t know. That was basically what l wanted—that at the end there would be two possibilities, and they would be both true—for me they are both true—it’s not either one or the other. It’s not that either it’s a dream or it is a reality. It is a dream and it is a reality. And I think they’re both there." (Paul Verhoeven's interview with Chris Shea & Wade Jennings, 1992) P.S: On this day, 36 years ago, "Total Recall" (1990) premiered in Los Angeles, California, USA.

DepressedBergman

66,465 views • 3 months ago

🚨 MIND-BLOWN: Tyler Bowyer & Erika Kirk's Families KNEW Each Other Since IRAQ War Days – Families Served on the SAME Base During Operation Enduring Freedom In Iraq?! 😱 Picking up in 2011: The U.S. Black Sea Rotational Force is active in Constanța, Romania, training local militaries in riot control, roadside bombs, and counter-insurgency. Here's the wild part — the majority of these Marines hail from Reno, Nevada, the heart of America's casino and gambling industry... right as Romania's gambling laws shift toward monopolies for the elite. Coincidence? Candace doesn't think so. Even more suspicious: Student "researchers" and volunteers flood into Romania that same year — and many are from the University of Nevada, Reno. Articles confirm Nevada grads like Alex Red Eye, Julie Chris, Jenny Sales, and Amber Herta heading over to teach and assist in schools. Meanwhile, back in the U.S.: Tyler Bowyer returns from his Romania trip (complete with models, girls, bottles, and beach parties). In April 2011, he gets elected by the Arizona Senate as the student representative to the Arizona Board of Regents — the governing body overseeing Arizona's public universities, including ASU policies. Right after his appointment, Erika Frantzve (now Kirk) enrolls at Arizona State University for her final year of college. The "synergy" gets even crazier: Erika's cousin, Lt. Col. Dennis Frantzve (a Marine lieutenant colonel), is stationed in Romania in 2011 with the Black Sea Rotational Force. He came out of retirement specifically to help set things up in Constanța. But it goes deeper — before Romania, Dennis served in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom... the exact same operation where Lori Frantzve (Erika's mom) won awards for her tech LLC (E3 Tech / AZ Tech) related to classified work. And get this: Dennis was stationed alongside a Sergeant Boyer (note the spelling variation — Tyler sometimes drops the 'w' in Bowyer). Could these families have known each other for decades through military deployments? Candace: "I'm wondering if these families go way back... That's what my crazy conspiracy mind is thinking." Reno gambling ties + U.S. military rotations + family overlaps in Iraq/Afghanistan + Tyler's sudden rise + Erika's ASU timing = a web that's too connected to ignore. Is this all random coincidence... or something much bigger? FOLLOW Candace Owens and Watch the FULL mind-bending episode below.👇 What do YOU think? Coincidence or CONNECTIONS? Drop your theories below. 🔥 RT if this series just keeps getting wilder!

🚨 MIND-BLOWN: Tyler Bowyer & Erika Kirk's Families KNEW Each Other Since IRAQ War Days – Families Served on the SAME Base During Operation Enduring Freedom In Iraq?! 😱 Picking up in 2011: The U.S. Black Sea Rotational Force is active in Constanța, Romania, training local militaries in riot control, roadside bombs, and counter-insurgency. Here's the wild part — the majority of these Marines hail from Reno, Nevada, the heart of America's casino and gambling industry... right as Romania's gambling laws shift toward monopolies for the elite. Coincidence? Candace doesn't think so. Even more suspicious: Student "researchers" and volunteers flood into Romania that same year — and many are from the University of Nevada, Reno. Articles confirm Nevada grads like Alex Red Eye, Julie Chris, Jenny Sales, and Amber Herta heading over to teach and assist in schools. Meanwhile, back in the U.S.: Tyler Bowyer returns from his Romania trip (complete with models, girls, bottles, and beach parties). In April 2011, he gets elected by the Arizona Senate as the student representative to the Arizona Board of Regents — the governing body overseeing Arizona's public universities, including ASU policies. Right after his appointment, Erika Frantzve (now Kirk) enrolls at Arizona State University for her final year of college. The "synergy" gets even crazier: Erika's cousin, Lt. Col. Dennis Frantzve (a Marine lieutenant colonel), is stationed in Romania in 2011 with the Black Sea Rotational Force. He came out of retirement specifically to help set things up in Constanța. But it goes deeper — before Romania, Dennis served in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom... the exact same operation where Lori Frantzve (Erika's mom) won awards for her tech LLC (E3 Tech / AZ Tech) related to classified work. And get this: Dennis was stationed alongside a Sergeant Boyer (note the spelling variation — Tyler sometimes drops the 'w' in Bowyer). Could these families have known each other for decades through military deployments? Candace: "I'm wondering if these families go way back... That's what my crazy conspiracy mind is thinking." Reno gambling ties + U.S. military rotations + family overlaps in Iraq/Afghanistan + Tyler's sudden rise + Erika's ASU timing = a web that's too connected to ignore. Is this all random coincidence... or something much bigger? FOLLOW Candace Owens and Watch the FULL mind-bending episode below.👇 What do YOU think? Coincidence or CONNECTIONS? Drop your theories below. 🔥 RT if this series just keeps getting wilder!

Project Constitution

86,596 views • 6 months ago

New short course: Evaluating AI Agents! Evals are important for driving AI system improvements, and in this course you'll learn to systematically assess and improve an AI agent’s performance. This is built in partnership with Arize AI and taught by John Gilhuly, Head of Developer Relations, and , Director of Product. I've often found evals to be a critical tool in the agent development process - they can be the difference between picking the right thing to work on vs. wasting weeks of effort. Whether you’re building a shopping assistant, coding agent, or research assistant, having a structured evaluation process helps you refine its performance systematically, rather than relying on random trial and error. This course shows you how to structure your evals to assess the performance of each component of an agent and its end-to-end performance. For each component, you select the appropriate evaluators, test examples, and performance metrics. This helps you identify areas for improvement both during development and in production. (If you're familiar with error analysis in supervised learning, think of this as adapting those ideas to agentic workflows.) In this course, you'll build an AI agent, and add observability to visualize and debug its steps. You’ll learn about code-based evals, in which you write code explicitly to test a certain step, as well as LLM-as-a-Judge evals, in which you prompt an LLM to efficiently come up with ways to evaluate more open-ended outputs. In detail, you’ll: - Understand key differences between evaluating LLM-based systems and traditional software testing. - Add observability to an agent by collecting traces of the steps taken by the agent and visualizing them - Choose the appropriate evaluator - code-based, LLM-as-a-Judge, human-annotation based - for each component. - Compute a convergence score to evaluate if your agent can respond to a query in an efficient number of steps. - Run structured experiments to improve the agent’s performance by exploring changes to the prompt, LLM model, or the agent’s logic. - Understand how to deploy these evaluation techniques to monitor the agent’s performance in production. By the end of this course, you’ll know how to trace AI agents, systematically evaluate them, and improve their performance. Please sign up here:

New short course: Evaluating AI Agents! Evals are important for driving AI system improvements, and in this course you'll learn to systematically assess and improve an AI agent’s performance. This is built in partnership with Arize AI and taught by John Gilhuly, Head of Developer Relations, and , Director of Product. I've often found evals to be a critical tool in the agent development process - they can be the difference between picking the right thing to work on vs. wasting weeks of effort. Whether you’re building a shopping assistant, coding agent, or research assistant, having a structured evaluation process helps you refine its performance systematically, rather than relying on random trial and error. This course shows you how to structure your evals to assess the performance of each component of an agent and its end-to-end performance. For each component, you select the appropriate evaluators, test examples, and performance metrics. This helps you identify areas for improvement both during development and in production. (If you're familiar with error analysis in supervised learning, think of this as adapting those ideas to agentic workflows.) In this course, you'll build an AI agent, and add observability to visualize and debug its steps. You’ll learn about code-based evals, in which you write code explicitly to test a certain step, as well as LLM-as-a-Judge evals, in which you prompt an LLM to efficiently come up with ways to evaluate more open-ended outputs. In detail, you’ll: - Understand key differences between evaluating LLM-based systems and traditional software testing. - Add observability to an agent by collecting traces of the steps taken by the agent and visualizing them - Choose the appropriate evaluator - code-based, LLM-as-a-Judge, human-annotation based - for each component. - Compute a convergence score to evaluate if your agent can respond to a query in an efficient number of steps. - Run structured experiments to improve the agent’s performance by exploring changes to the prompt, LLM model, or the agent’s logic. - Understand how to deploy these evaluation techniques to monitor the agent’s performance in production. By the end of this course, you’ll know how to trace AI agents, systematically evaluate them, and improve their performance. Please sign up here:

Andrew Ng

126,675 views • 1 year ago