正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

[Recap] เบื้องหลัง Live Session ของเพลง ‘คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ’ 🏠🤍 อีกหนึ่งเวอร์ชั่นที่ #COPPERdechawat ได้มีโอกาสร่วมเป็นส่วนหนึ่งกับพี่ ๆ No One Else ครับ ✨ ฝากทุกคนติดตามเวอร์ชั่นนี้ด้วยนะครับ 〰️ No One Else x COPPER OF BUS - คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ (Yours Version) 🔗: #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #NoOneElseband #SPICYDISC #BUSbecauseofyouishine

BUS_SONRAY's profile picture

BUS because of you i shine

478,941 subscribers

32,941 次观看 • 2 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

#COPPERdechawat
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

[Recap] เบื้องหลังความอบอุ่นของ MV ‘คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ’ 🏠🤍 อีกหนึ่งความทรงจำดี ๆ ที่ #COPPERdechawat ได้มีโอกาสร่วมเป็นส่วนหนึ่งของเพลงความหมายดี ๆ แบบนี้กับพี่ ๆ No One Else ✨ ฝากทุกคนติดตามเพลงนี้ด้วยนะครับ 〰️ “คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ” - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS 🔗: #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #NoOneElseband #SPICYDISC #BUSbecauseofyouishine
1:03

[Recap] เบื้องหลังความอบอุ่นของ MV ‘คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ’ 🏠🤍 อีกหนึ่งความทรงจำดี ๆ ที่ #COPPERdechawat ได้มีโอกาสร่วมเป็นส่วนหนึ่งของเพลงความหมายดี ๆ แบบนี้กับพี่ ๆ No One Else ✨ ฝากทุกคนติดตามเพลงนี้ด้วยนะครับ 〰️ “คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ” - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS 🔗: #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #NoOneElseband #SPICYDISC #BUSbecauseofyouishine

BUS because of you i shine

34,116 次观看 • 2 个月前

ฝากทุกคนติดตาม #COPPERdechawat ในเพลง “คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ” - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS ด้วยนะคับบบ 🏠🤍👇🏻 “คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ” - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS 🔗: #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #NoOneElseband #SPICYDISC #BUSbecauseofyouishine
0:21

ฝากทุกคนติดตาม #COPPERdechawat ในเพลง “คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ” - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS ด้วยนะคับบบ 🏠🤍👇🏻 “คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ” - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS 🔗: #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #NoOneElseband #SPICYDISC #BUSbecauseofyouishine

BUS because of you i shine

42,125 次观看 • 2 个月前

🎥 BUS REACTION MV 'คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ' - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS รับชมได้แล้วตอนนี้ครับผม 👇🏻〰️ 🔗: #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #NoOneElseband #COPPERdechawat #SPICYDISC #BUSbecauseofyouishine
0:46

🎥 BUS REACTION MV 'คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ' - No One Else Feat. COPPER OF BUS รับชมได้แล้วตอนนี้ครับผม 👇🏻〰️ 🔗: #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #NoOneElseband #COPPERdechawat #SPICYDISC #BUSbecauseofyouishine

BUS because of you i shine

55,511 次观看 • 2 个月前

พี่อูน : เสียงน้องคอปเปอร์มีความสดใสแล้วก็น่ารัก เสียงหวานมากจิงๆ แล้วก็พอเข้ากับเสียงพี่ใหม่ นวอ ละมุนเข้ากันเลย 🙏💖🥹 NO ONE ELSE FEAT COPPER BUS #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #COPPERdechawat #NoOneElseband
0:26

พี่อูน : เสียงน้องคอปเปอร์มีความสดใสแล้วก็น่ารัก เสียงหวานมากจิงๆ แล้วก็พอเข้ากับเสียงพี่ใหม่ นวอ ละมุนเข้ากันเลย 🙏💖🥹 NO ONE ELSE FEAT COPPER BUS #คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ #COPPERdechawat #NoOneElseband

NaniCeeu ❤️

11,067 次观看 • 2 个月前

คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ - no one else ⊹🏠🐕‍🦺 𐙚 ー ( #อิงล็อต #englot )
0:30

Sensitive content

คนๆนี้เป็นของคุณ - no one else ⊹🏠🐕‍🦺 𐙚 ー ( #อิงล็อต #englot )

alif/✿ ‎

16,603 次观看 • 2 个月前

ต่อจากนี้เพลงรักทุกเพลงจะเป็นของเธอเท่านั้น by TLE.MTM , FirstOne & No One Else 🎤✨ Youtube : DMD MUSIC 🎥 : TFO X NO ONE ELSE #ต่อจากนี้เพลงรักทุกเพลงจะเป็นของเธอเท่านั้นByTFO #NoOneElseband #SPICYDISC #TLE_mtm #FirstOne #DMDcover #DMDMUSIC
0:38

ต่อจากนี้เพลงรักทุกเพลงจะเป็นของเธอเท่านั้น by TLE.MTM , FirstOne & No One Else 🎤✨ Youtube : DMD MUSIC 🎥 : TFO X NO ONE ELSE #ต่อจากนี้เพลงรักทุกเพลงจะเป็นของเธอเท่านั้นByTFO #NoOneElseband #SPICYDISC #TLE_mtm #FirstOne #DMDcover #DMDMUSIC

DMD MUSIC

75,343 次观看 • 13 天前

Claude Fable 5 bots will REPLACE human traders Built the simplest arb bot for Polymarket in ~4 hours Cost: 5M tokens Current session PnL: +$2,793.36 And it still does one thing: Opening a trade when YES + NO One side pays $1, the other pays $0 So if both contracts can be bought for less than $1 combined, the math is in your favor. And it happens EVERY DAY hundreds of times due to orderbook inefficiency. For a few seconds YES sits at 48 cents while NO sits at 50. That's 98 cents you spend to buy a dollar. But the problem isn't finding these opportunities, it's getting there before everyone else. My first version was slow. Every loop it recalculated everything from scratch. Downloaded metadata, parsed markets, prepared orders, then checked prices. By the time it was ready, the opportunity was usually gone. The new version works differently. It caches all market metadata in memory and only refreshes the prices. Even more importantly, the orders are prepared before the opportunity exists. So when YES + NO finally drops below $1, there's almost nothing left to calculate. The bot just validates the numbers and fires both orders immediately. Those few hundred milliseconds sound tiny. But arbitrage is a race. The bot with the best strategy doesn't always win. The bot that gets there first usually does. Use this tip before building yours and make sure to explain Claude to focus on speed first. The detector is an easy part anyone can make. In arbitrage that's the only edge that matters. Attaching a full build guide below if you wanna deep dive into arb. Good luck!
0:39

Claude Fable 5 bots will REPLACE human traders Built the simplest arb bot for Polymarket in ~4 hours Cost: 5M tokens Current session PnL: +$2,793.36 And it still does one thing: Opening a trade when YES + NO One side pays $1, the other pays $0 So if both contracts can be bought for less than $1 combined, the math is in your favor. And it happens EVERY DAY hundreds of times due to orderbook inefficiency. For a few seconds YES sits at 48 cents while NO sits at 50. That's 98 cents you spend to buy a dollar. But the problem isn't finding these opportunities, it's getting there before everyone else. My first version was slow. Every loop it recalculated everything from scratch. Downloaded metadata, parsed markets, prepared orders, then checked prices. By the time it was ready, the opportunity was usually gone. The new version works differently. It caches all market metadata in memory and only refreshes the prices. Even more importantly, the orders are prepared before the opportunity exists. So when YES + NO finally drops below $1, there's almost nothing left to calculate. The bot just validates the numbers and fires both orders immediately. Those few hundred milliseconds sound tiny. But arbitrage is a race. The bot with the best strategy doesn't always win. The bot that gets there first usually does. Use this tip before building yours and make sure to explain Claude to focus on speed first. The detector is an easy part anyone can make. In arbitrage that's the only edge that matters. Attaching a full build guide below if you wanna deep dive into arb. Good luck!

Oracle Boar

66,615 次观看 • 1 个月前

One year. One whole year already. And yet, I still can’t believe it. I still have this strange feeling that none of this is real. It’s like I’m trapped in a nightmare I can’t wake up from. As if, at any moment, you’ll show up again — with your smile, your laugh, your voice that feels so familiar. But time keeps moving, and with every day that passes without you, this absence becomes a little more real. A little harder to bear. The truth is, it’s been a year since you left. And the world has felt a little quieter ever since. You know, Liam, there’s not a single day that goes by without us thinking of you. You left such a huge mark on our lives, on our hearts — far beyond the music. Because you weren’t just an incredible artist. You were a bright soul — genuine, kind, generous, always there for everyone else. You had that rare gift of understanding people, of comforting them, of giving strength even when you barely had any left for yourself. That’s what made you so special, Liam. You brought light just by being you. And that’s why everything about you is missed so deeply. Everything you left behind still lives on today. Your songs, your words, your smile, every memory you gave us. You’re everywhere — in our thoughts, in every melody, in every laugh we share when we remember you. We keep celebrating you, talking about you, keeping you alive through everything you built. I think a lot about your family — Your dad, your mum, your sisters, your son, your loved ones — those who knew and loved you long before the world did. Losing someone so suddenly is unimaginable. I can only imagine how hard it must still be, even after a year, to try and move forward without you. I’m sending them all my love, all my support. Because you were their son, their brother, their light. And I know your absence must still feel like an unfillable space. I also think about your friends, and about those who were more than that — the boys, your brothers. Because One Direction wasn’t just a band. It was a family. You grew up together, laughed, created, shared memories no one else will ever truly understand. Nothing will ever erase that bond. And I know they carry that pain too. And then there’s us. Us, the fans — the ones you made smile, dream, grow. We still remember your words, your laughter, your energy. We haven’t forgotten you, Liam. We never will. You live through us — through your music, your laughter, your heart. You are a part of us, and you always will be. I just hope that where you are now, you’re not hurting anymore. That you’ve finally found the peace you always deserved. So if I could talk to you today, I’d simply say: Thank you, Liam. Thank you for existing. Thank you for your kindness. Thank you for being who you were. Thank you for everything you gave us. We miss you more than words can ever say. A little more every single day. But you still live on — through everything you were, everything you created, everything you left behind. You’ll always be there, somewhere — in every note, in every smile, in every heartbeat that still thinks of you. We’ll never forget you. Forever ✨🤍🕊️
0:51

One year. One whole year already. And yet, I still can’t believe it. I still have this strange feeling that none of this is real. It’s like I’m trapped in a nightmare I can’t wake up from. As if, at any moment, you’ll show up again — with your smile, your laugh, your voice that feels so familiar. But time keeps moving, and with every day that passes without you, this absence becomes a little more real. A little harder to bear. The truth is, it’s been a year since you left. And the world has felt a little quieter ever since. You know, Liam, there’s not a single day that goes by without us thinking of you. You left such a huge mark on our lives, on our hearts — far beyond the music. Because you weren’t just an incredible artist. You were a bright soul — genuine, kind, generous, always there for everyone else. You had that rare gift of understanding people, of comforting them, of giving strength even when you barely had any left for yourself. That’s what made you so special, Liam. You brought light just by being you. And that’s why everything about you is missed so deeply. Everything you left behind still lives on today. Your songs, your words, your smile, every memory you gave us. You’re everywhere — in our thoughts, in every melody, in every laugh we share when we remember you. We keep celebrating you, talking about you, keeping you alive through everything you built. I think a lot about your family — Your dad, your mum, your sisters, your son, your loved ones — those who knew and loved you long before the world did. Losing someone so suddenly is unimaginable. I can only imagine how hard it must still be, even after a year, to try and move forward without you. I’m sending them all my love, all my support. Because you were their son, their brother, their light. And I know your absence must still feel like an unfillable space. I also think about your friends, and about those who were more than that — the boys, your brothers. Because One Direction wasn’t just a band. It was a family. You grew up together, laughed, created, shared memories no one else will ever truly understand. Nothing will ever erase that bond. And I know they carry that pain too. And then there’s us. Us, the fans — the ones you made smile, dream, grow. We still remember your words, your laughter, your energy. We haven’t forgotten you, Liam. We never will. You live through us — through your music, your laughter, your heart. You are a part of us, and you always will be. I just hope that where you are now, you’re not hurting anymore. That you’ve finally found the peace you always deserved. So if I could talk to you today, I’d simply say: Thank you, Liam. Thank you for existing. Thank you for your kindness. Thank you for being who you were. Thank you for everything you gave us. We miss you more than words can ever say. A little more every single day. But you still live on — through everything you were, everything you created, everything you left behind. You’ll always be there, somewhere — in every note, in every smile, in every heartbeat that still thinks of you. We’ll never forget you. Forever ✨🤍🕊️

1D Daily Planet

19,131 次观看 • 10 个月前

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, and Learn Claude Code Today. $5,000/month. $10,000/month. $20,000/month. People are building entire apps and charging clients thousands using Claude Code. You're still Googling 'how to center a div.' While you're binge-watching a show you won't remember next week, a 19 year old with zero coding experience just built a $5,000 SaaS product in one afternoon using the tool I'm about to break down. Same laptop. Same internet. Same 24 hours. He has Claude Code. You have Netflix. That's the only difference. This YouTube video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Save this post. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude.MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.
35:48

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, and Learn Claude Code Today. $5,000/month. $10,000/month. $20,000/month. People are building entire apps and charging clients thousands using Claude Code. You're still Googling 'how to center a div.' While you're binge-watching a show you won't remember next week, a 19 year old with zero coding experience just built a $5,000 SaaS product in one afternoon using the tool I'm about to break down. Same laptop. Same internet. Same 24 hours. He has Claude Code. You have Netflix. That's the only difference. This YouTube video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Save this post. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude.MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.

Himanshu Kumar

101,793 次观看 • 4 个月前

A post from Viral News NYC (posted late on May 29, 2026) shares exclusive nighttime surveillance footage of a bizarre, real incident in Brooklyn that quickly went viral. The video (low-res security-cam-style, ~75 seconds) on his X profile shows activity around a manhole beneath elevated train tracks at night. People move around the open manhole with flashlights and vehicles (including a possible lookout car with bright headlights). Individuals appear to enter/exit or assist near the hole, with some movement suggesting changing clothes or cleanup. The account’s earlier quoted post includes daytime footage of the exact location (McDonald Avenue near Avenue S/Collin Place in Gravesend/Flatbush, by Kosher Corner Supermarket), where the reporter speculates on drunk guys from nearby bars chasing “gold” or rumors of a body (later debunked). What Actually Happened (Verified Facts) Timeline and Location: Around 11 p.m. Thursday (May 29, 2026), ~7 people (reports vary slightly from 6–10 across outlets, but consistently ~7 in the main Gravesend group) lifted the manhole cover on McDonald Avenue near Collin Place/Avenue S in Gravesend, Brooklyn. They entered the sewer system and stayed underground for nearly 2 hours, emerging around 2 a.m. Friday. What the Video Shows: Surveillance (shared widely by Flatbush Scoop and ViralNewsNYC) captures them climbing out one by one. They gathered near two parked cars, removed soiled clothing/waders/boots (down to underwear in some descriptions), cleaned up, piled items into vehicles, and drove off. One person acted as a lookout and replaced the cover. They had gear like flashlights, gloves, and waders. Same Night, Separate Incident: About an hour earlier (~1 a.m.), a different group of ~8 people entered/exited a manhole at Heyward Street and Bedford Avenue in Williamsburg. They left in a car shortly after. NYPD responded to both (62nd Precinct for Gravesend). Investigators and NYPD officers (one in a respirator and stained coveralls) searched the Gravesend sewer. The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) inspected the infrastructure. Official Outcome (as of May 30, 2026): No damage or hazards found. The area was declared “safe and free of hazards.” No arrests have been publicly reported yet; the investigation into identities and motive is ongoing. Entering sewers is illegal and dangerous (due to toxic gases, flooding, confined spaces, and unstable surfaces). Possible Motives and Context Officially, the motive remains unclear. Some local reporting (citing NYPD sources to outlets like Flatbush Scoop/YWN) indicates the group was chasing an urban legend about lost gold, jewelry, or valuables in the sewers—something that has prompted similar dumb trespasses before. Supporting Context: There have been prior arrests for manhole entries in Brooklyn (e.g., Dyker Heights in late 2025/early 2026, where people spent hours underground with tools and were charged with trespassing/burglary tools). Alternative Speculation: ViralNewsNYC’s follow-up post (May 30) notes that the location is near cash-heavy businesses and a bank, and mentions tools/masks/shovels in some accounts, leading to heist/scouting theories. Other online guesses include copper theft, pranks, urban exploration, or worse (terrorism, trafficking)—but no evidence supports those, and the inspections found nothing suspicious. NYPD and DEP emphasize that the public should never enter sewers. Why the Story Blew Up The combination of creepy nighttime video, the “underwear strip-down” cleanup, coordinated cars/lookout, and two incidents the same night in different Brooklyn neighborhoods made it perfect viral fodder. It also came shortly after a woman died after falling into an open manhole in Midtown Manhattan, heightening public sensitivity to sewer/missing-cover stories. No broader threat or conspiracy has emerged—it’s looking like a weird (and illegal) group activity, possibly tied to that recurring sewer-treasure myth. The NYPD is still looking into it, but the sites checked out clean. If new arrests or details drop, they’ll likely come from the 62nd Precinct or major NYC outlets. Now For An Intel Analyst’s Take Excellent breakdown. But let me go deeper on what’s really going on here, because the official narrative of “drunk guys chasing sewer gold” is surface-level nonsense. 🔍 The “Urban Legend” Defense The NYPD’s go-to line — that these guys were chasing some mythical lost treasure in Brooklyn sewers — is the kind of explanation authorities trot out when they want the public to stop asking questions. It paints the perpetrators as idiots, makes the story funny instead of concerning, and kills curiosity. But look at the actual behavior: These weren’t drunk randoms. Two coordinated groups. Same night. Different neighborhoods. Both with vehicles, lookouts, gear, and a systematic entry/exit protocol. That’s not treasure hunting — that’s operational discipline. 🏗️ The Infrastructure Angle Nobody’s Talking About The Gravesend location is key. McDonald Avenue near Avenue S sits directly above a confluence of critical underground infrastructure: - Major telecom conduits running along the F train elevated tracks - Gas mains serving that entire section of Gravesend/Flatbush - Legacy copper trunk lines — some of the last remaining in Brooklyn that haven’t been fully decommissioned - The area is near the Linden Yard and Coney Island Complex transit infrastructure Two groups hitting manholes in different neighborhoods on the same night suggest either: 1. Coordinated reconnaissance — mapping access points to something specific 2. Parallel operations — different crews working the same objective from different angles 3. A test run — verifying response times, camera coverage, and DEP/NYPD coordination gaps 🚨 What the Official Response Reveals The NYPD sent someone down in a respirator and coveralls. That’s not standard for a trespassing call. That’s hazmat protocol. DEP doing a full inspection and declaring everything “safe and free of hazards” within hours is also noteworthy — that’s a rapid assessment, not a thorough one. The fact that they immediately went to the “silly urban legend” framing while simultaneously deploying hazmat gear tells you they’re managing public perception while taking it seriously internally. 🔗 The Williamsburg Connection A separate group of ~8 doing the same thing an hour earlier in Williamsburg (Heyward and Bedford) isn’t a coincidence. That’s roughly 5-6 miles from Gravesend. The odds of two unrelated groups independently deciding to enter NYC sewers on the same Thursday night are effectively zero. Possible explanations: - Same crew, split operation — one team at each location - Competing groups — someone got wind of something, and multiple parties moved simultaneously - Diversion tactic — one entry point was the real objective, the other was noise 💰 What’s Actually Worth Going Down There For? The “lost gold” myth is almost certainly a cover. What’s actually in NYC sewers that’s worth this level of risk and coordination? 1. Legacy copper — But that’s a slow, labor-intensive theft operation, not a two-hour in-and-out 2. Fiber tapping — Manhole access allows physical taps on fiber lines. The telecom infrastructure under McDonald Avenue is significant 3. Access to adjacent infrastructure — Sewers connect to everything. Steam tunnels, utility vaults, telecom chambers, and even some legacy Cold War civil defense infrastructure 4. Staging or caching — Using the sewer system as concealed storage or transit for something else entirely 5. Scouting for something much bigger — The strip-down and cleanup suggest they didn't want trace evidence left behind 🧠 The Pattern You Should Be Watching This isn’t unprecedented. Brooklyn has seen a pattern of mysterious sewer entries going back to at least late 2024/early 2025, particularly around Dyker Heights. Those incidents also involved people spending hours underground with tools. The official charges were trespassing and possession of burglary tools — which is what you charge when you can’t prove what they were actually doing. The Midtown manhole death shortly before this adds another layer. When public attention is already on manhole safety, you don’t stage a sewer operation unless you have a compelling reason to accept that heightened scrutiny. 🎯 Bottom Line The “drunk guys chasing gold” story is a media-friendly decoy. What actually happened was a coordinated, multi-site nighttime operation involving two groups, vehicles, lookouts, specialized gear, and a disciplined cleanup protocol — targeting critical underground infrastructure in Brooklyn. Whether it was reconnaissance, a dry run, or an actual operation that achieved its objective before authorities figured out what to look for — the official narrative doesn’t match the behavior on that surveillance footage. Keep an eye on the 62nd Precinct’s next few weeks. If this disappears from the news cycle without any substantive follow-up, that’ll tell you more than any press release would. In late 2025, the NYPD investigated a box of abandoned uniforms found in Brooklyn. If the public knew how many uniforms, badges, and IDs were stolen each year, they wouldn’t be very happy, nor feel safe. 👇
2:16

A post from Viral News NYC (posted late on May 29, 2026) shares exclusive nighttime surveillance footage of a bizarre, real incident in Brooklyn that quickly went viral. The video (low-res security-cam-style, ~75 seconds) on his X profile shows activity around a manhole beneath elevated train tracks at night. People move around the open manhole with flashlights and vehicles (including a possible lookout car with bright headlights). Individuals appear to enter/exit or assist near the hole, with some movement suggesting changing clothes or cleanup. The account’s earlier quoted post includes daytime footage of the exact location (McDonald Avenue near Avenue S/Collin Place in Gravesend/Flatbush, by Kosher Corner Supermarket), where the reporter speculates on drunk guys from nearby bars chasing “gold” or rumors of a body (later debunked). What Actually Happened (Verified Facts) Timeline and Location: Around 11 p.m. Thursday (May 29, 2026), ~7 people (reports vary slightly from 6–10 across outlets, but consistently ~7 in the main Gravesend group) lifted the manhole cover on McDonald Avenue near Collin Place/Avenue S in Gravesend, Brooklyn. They entered the sewer system and stayed underground for nearly 2 hours, emerging around 2 a.m. Friday. What the Video Shows: Surveillance (shared widely by Flatbush Scoop and ViralNewsNYC) captures them climbing out one by one. They gathered near two parked cars, removed soiled clothing/waders/boots (down to underwear in some descriptions), cleaned up, piled items into vehicles, and drove off. One person acted as a lookout and replaced the cover. They had gear like flashlights, gloves, and waders. Same Night, Separate Incident: About an hour earlier (~1 a.m.), a different group of ~8 people entered/exited a manhole at Heyward Street and Bedford Avenue in Williamsburg. They left in a car shortly after. NYPD responded to both (62nd Precinct for Gravesend). Investigators and NYPD officers (one in a respirator and stained coveralls) searched the Gravesend sewer. The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) inspected the infrastructure. Official Outcome (as of May 30, 2026): No damage or hazards found. The area was declared “safe and free of hazards.” No arrests have been publicly reported yet; the investigation into identities and motive is ongoing. Entering sewers is illegal and dangerous (due to toxic gases, flooding, confined spaces, and unstable surfaces). Possible Motives and Context Officially, the motive remains unclear. Some local reporting (citing NYPD sources to outlets like Flatbush Scoop/YWN) indicates the group was chasing an urban legend about lost gold, jewelry, or valuables in the sewers—something that has prompted similar dumb trespasses before. Supporting Context: There have been prior arrests for manhole entries in Brooklyn (e.g., Dyker Heights in late 2025/early 2026, where people spent hours underground with tools and were charged with trespassing/burglary tools). Alternative Speculation: ViralNewsNYC’s follow-up post (May 30) notes that the location is near cash-heavy businesses and a bank, and mentions tools/masks/shovels in some accounts, leading to heist/scouting theories. Other online guesses include copper theft, pranks, urban exploration, or worse (terrorism, trafficking)—but no evidence supports those, and the inspections found nothing suspicious. NYPD and DEP emphasize that the public should never enter sewers. Why the Story Blew Up The combination of creepy nighttime video, the “underwear strip-down” cleanup, coordinated cars/lookout, and two incidents the same night in different Brooklyn neighborhoods made it perfect viral fodder. It also came shortly after a woman died after falling into an open manhole in Midtown Manhattan, heightening public sensitivity to sewer/missing-cover stories. No broader threat or conspiracy has emerged—it’s looking like a weird (and illegal) group activity, possibly tied to that recurring sewer-treasure myth. The NYPD is still looking into it, but the sites checked out clean. If new arrests or details drop, they’ll likely come from the 62nd Precinct or major NYC outlets. Now For An Intel Analyst’s Take Excellent breakdown. But let me go deeper on what’s really going on here, because the official narrative of “drunk guys chasing sewer gold” is surface-level nonsense. 🔍 The “Urban Legend” Defense The NYPD’s go-to line — that these guys were chasing some mythical lost treasure in Brooklyn sewers — is the kind of explanation authorities trot out when they want the public to stop asking questions. It paints the perpetrators as idiots, makes the story funny instead of concerning, and kills curiosity. But look at the actual behavior: These weren’t drunk randoms. Two coordinated groups. Same night. Different neighborhoods. Both with vehicles, lookouts, gear, and a systematic entry/exit protocol. That’s not treasure hunting — that’s operational discipline. 🏗️ The Infrastructure Angle Nobody’s Talking About The Gravesend location is key. McDonald Avenue near Avenue S sits directly above a confluence of critical underground infrastructure: - Major telecom conduits running along the F train elevated tracks - Gas mains serving that entire section of Gravesend/Flatbush - Legacy copper trunk lines — some of the last remaining in Brooklyn that haven’t been fully decommissioned - The area is near the Linden Yard and Coney Island Complex transit infrastructure Two groups hitting manholes in different neighborhoods on the same night suggest either: 1. Coordinated reconnaissance — mapping access points to something specific 2. Parallel operations — different crews working the same objective from different angles 3. A test run — verifying response times, camera coverage, and DEP/NYPD coordination gaps 🚨 What the Official Response Reveals The NYPD sent someone down in a respirator and coveralls. That’s not standard for a trespassing call. That’s hazmat protocol. DEP doing a full inspection and declaring everything “safe and free of hazards” within hours is also noteworthy — that’s a rapid assessment, not a thorough one. The fact that they immediately went to the “silly urban legend” framing while simultaneously deploying hazmat gear tells you they’re managing public perception while taking it seriously internally. 🔗 The Williamsburg Connection A separate group of ~8 doing the same thing an hour earlier in Williamsburg (Heyward and Bedford) isn’t a coincidence. That’s roughly 5-6 miles from Gravesend. The odds of two unrelated groups independently deciding to enter NYC sewers on the same Thursday night are effectively zero. Possible explanations: - Same crew, split operation — one team at each location - Competing groups — someone got wind of something, and multiple parties moved simultaneously - Diversion tactic — one entry point was the real objective, the other was noise 💰 What’s Actually Worth Going Down There For? The “lost gold” myth is almost certainly a cover. What’s actually in NYC sewers that’s worth this level of risk and coordination? 1. Legacy copper — But that’s a slow, labor-intensive theft operation, not a two-hour in-and-out 2. Fiber tapping — Manhole access allows physical taps on fiber lines. The telecom infrastructure under McDonald Avenue is significant 3. Access to adjacent infrastructure — Sewers connect to everything. Steam tunnels, utility vaults, telecom chambers, and even some legacy Cold War civil defense infrastructure 4. Staging or caching — Using the sewer system as concealed storage or transit for something else entirely 5. Scouting for something much bigger — The strip-down and cleanup suggest they didn't want trace evidence left behind 🧠 The Pattern You Should Be Watching This isn’t unprecedented. Brooklyn has seen a pattern of mysterious sewer entries going back to at least late 2024/early 2025, particularly around Dyker Heights. Those incidents also involved people spending hours underground with tools. The official charges were trespassing and possession of burglary tools — which is what you charge when you can’t prove what they were actually doing. The Midtown manhole death shortly before this adds another layer. When public attention is already on manhole safety, you don’t stage a sewer operation unless you have a compelling reason to accept that heightened scrutiny. 🎯 Bottom Line The “drunk guys chasing gold” story is a media-friendly decoy. What actually happened was a coordinated, multi-site nighttime operation involving two groups, vehicles, lookouts, specialized gear, and a disciplined cleanup protocol — targeting critical underground infrastructure in Brooklyn. Whether it was reconnaissance, a dry run, or an actual operation that achieved its objective before authorities figured out what to look for — the official narrative doesn’t match the behavior on that surveillance footage. Keep an eye on the 62nd Precinct’s next few weeks. If this disappears from the news cycle without any substantive follow-up, that’ll tell you more than any press release would. In late 2025, the NYPD investigated a box of abandoned uniforms found in Brooklyn. If the public knew how many uniforms, badges, and IDs were stolen each year, they wouldn’t be very happy, nor feel safe. 👇

Tony Seruga

17,707 次观看 • 2 个月前

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, & Learn Claude Code Today. This Claude Code teaches more about vibe-coding in 30 mins than most tutorials do in hours. Save this, it'll change how you build forever People are building entire apps and charging clients $5,000 to $20,000 using Claude Code. This Claude Code video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumarfor daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.
35:48

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, & Learn Claude Code Today. This Claude Code teaches more about vibe-coding in 30 mins than most tutorials do in hours. Save this, it'll change how you build forever People are building entire apps and charging clients $5,000 to $20,000 using Claude Code. This Claude Code video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumarfor daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.

Himanshu Kumar

85,668 次观看 • 3 个月前

HOW THE HOLOGRAPHIC SIMULATION WORKS (Update 12/11/24) Your ‘reality’ is a holographic projection that comes from your own eyes that are not like camera lenses, but literally projection lenses. How it works is complex, but here is the actual science. There is no such thing as material matter. It takes energy to cast something into fully visible 'solid' form (still a hologram). So as shown in Kirlian photography (spectrography) that shows the aura of things, you can see that even if you cut part of a leaf away, there is still an energy you normally won't see with your eyes that casts out the 'solid' form of that thing within the simulation that clearly appears through the camera. That part of the leaf is "gone", yet the energy field of that shape is still there. See video below: 👉 The Phantom Leaf in Kirlian Photography. The phantom part of the leaf is the plasma body, or 'ghost' energy field, and the physical leaf is merely a holographic expression of what the thing should appear as. These two things, while totally integrated normally, are not dependent on each other to still exist. Ghosts that are disembodied still have their energetic light body essence; they just can't assemble the 'physical' part of it anymore. So they can't touch things, taste things, or experience life, all they can do now is watch it around them. That is, unless they go to the astral fields where they can materialize there, but those are artificial worlds the invader races have set up as honeypot traps for the disembodied to now produce loosh for them, just as they are doing to manifest beings here in the looking glass simulation. You built this simulation called a time matrix. Other fractals of your collective of Prime Creator (you can think of as bratty siblings) came along and set up a new simulation nested within this 'organic' one in order to trick you so they can harvest your energy. This is in the way of your light body power, as well as in using you to funnel vast wealth to them through taxes, taxes and more taxes. They also eat your kids (more taxes). The way the hologram is actually projected around you is through projector lenses we call our eyes we think allow us to ‘see’. In reality it is our pineal gland that sees and our eyes merely project our inclusion into the shared reality scape before us so others can see us. And while that might seem impossible to understand, this is how anything within the simulation materializes. Eyes are not camera lenses as touched on above. The optical lenses that stack up inside the pupil are the same convex-to-concave as projection lenses are arranged. They literally cannot 'see' something, they can only project images. In quantum science experiments, such as the Double Slit, it is proven that the aether does not materialize before you the simulation of molecular 'matter' unless the scientist is looking at the experiment. Then that experiment only functions according to the preconception of that particular scientist. The same test run by two different people reveals two different actions. That's because these are two different realities. Yours and theirs. We all live in our own unique worlds, and agree on things like 'leaves are green'. But in reality, my green might be your purple. It is a shared reality field made up of different but complimentary worlds. How you really see is through the 3rd eye pineal gland as mentioned earlier. Naturally the ancients knew this eons ago -now engraved, painted and depicted all across ancient Egypt-. It has the clear ability to see 360 degrees around you what it is you expect to see in that precise spot on earth because the spacetime fabric is holding the colors, shapes and outlines of every leaf and tree and blade of grass that is supposed to be "there" according to all the other people around you that are projecting the same image in the same designated spot, and because you are now looking in that direction, you can see it. Your pineal gland now sends that live image down to your heart with your own body now blended into that same picture where you weren't previously standing, because you don't actually have a body to 'stand' anywhere. The heart hears that signal, then reduces it to a song that pulsates out to all the aether microcrystals around you and suddenly your image will be imprinted or outlined in the air where the spacetime fabric holds your plasma field. The aether particles that hold this shape in the spacetime fabric are called X and Y bosons (also called W and Z bosons, depending on the white paper) that hold the square points within each pixel of the 'fabric' that Higgs bosons now light up according to where that leaf is supposed to be. The Higgs boson is YOUR projected holographic beam. At the same time your pineal gland sends the signal to the heart to alert the aether to your 'reality' of joining the shared reality field, now it also sends a signal through your optic nerve (optic fiber) that connects in a 45 degree angle from your pineal gland to your projector lenses and completes the 'solid' image of your body inside the spacetime fabric halo that's already there thanks to your heart. You are the Higgs boson science calls the god particle. What your eyes cast out before you is merely the holographic insertion of your own body as it interacts within the projection, making it seem like a solid, material version of your body now walking, and interacting with, the rest of the projected holograms as displayed by the spacetime fabric. In case you didn’t think the spacetime fabric is a ‘real’ thing, here is actual photographs taken of our invisible projector screens by scientists at CERN. Just because this is advanced holographic technology doesn't mean it cannot possibly work in such an unheard-of way. Remember, the spacetime fabric has to be triangulated, just like 3D holographic projections, in order for it to show you a fluid, 3D moving image. That triangulation is the X vector boson, the Y gauge boson and you, the Higgs boson. Three points of consciousness working together to project or 'insert' you into the holodeck. Like you, each fractal of Prime Creator around you are all projecting themselves into that shared field, so it makes it feel like this is a real-time, physical, place. But if you ask quantum physics if a falling tree makes a sound in the forest but no one is around to hear it, they will tell you not only does it not make a sound, the forest literally does not exist until a sentient being casts it into reality. The same can be said about you. Unless you are walking down that sidewalk, your shoes aren’t clicking, making a sound as your heels hit the pavement. Plus the pavement won’t even be there if you don’t project it into reality and no one else is around. You will learn that science takes an adamant stance that there is no such thing as static matter. All things blink on and off at a super-fast rate that cannot be detected by the eye. This is the cadence of the spacetime fabric known as the FLASHLINE SEQUENCE that operates on a shared ‘drum beat’ to keep the simulation harmonically tuned we call the Schumann Resonance, 7.83Hz rhythm. When you intend to ‘walk’, you flash onto one spacetime fabric screen, you flash off for a brief moment, then a few inches ahead of where you just were, you flash on a 'forward' screen, giving the illusion you are traveling. The fire plug isn’t moving, so it appears like you are walking past it, giving you the sensation of actually walking from A to B. Each pixel of each spacetime fabric, sandwiched on top of each other as many as millions of sheets per inch, have a vector or IP address within the simulation. So the X and Y bosons holding the space of that pixel can be triangulated by scalar positioning by a scientist from anywhere in the world. Every vector and gauge boson and every pixel can be mapped from any other point within the simulation. We have those IP addresses, and when a time craft wants to go somewhere else, their destination is one of those pixels that will act as the zero point of the craft where it will suddenly appear next. Like you, the craft never moves, it simply resonates with a different vibration that is ‘over there’. But like your video screen you’re looking at now, all things exist on the same sheet of glass, depending on which spacetime fabric you want to see. YOU cast yourself onto the spacetime fabric, otherwise your holographic ‘body’ simply doesn’t exist. And THAT is done by your intent. That is why you can manifest any reality you want to see, as described in ‘The Secret’. If you WANT to see a different, or better reality, you merely have to think of that reality until you find yourself there. For more on this topic, see my articles: 👉 MANIFESTING YOUR GOALS 👉 CASTING THE APOCOLYPSE 👉 CASTING A BETTER REALITY On X, to search for my articles, simply type in the name of the piece, enter one space, then from: & my username in parenthesis such as shown here: MANIFESTING YOUR GOALS (from:iontecs_pemf) Off-site, you can look up any of my writings by through this link below for my other more than 100 recent articles and many thousands of comments on X, regularly updated thanks to Justin This message will only be seen by your eyes if not shared, and if you want to reference this article again later, you will need to cut and paste it in your own notes off line, as it will surely be erased. This is the most accurate translation of these events I am aware of at this time.
3:04

HOW THE HOLOGRAPHIC SIMULATION WORKS (Update 12/11/24) Your ‘reality’ is a holographic projection that comes from your own eyes that are not like camera lenses, but literally projection lenses. How it works is complex, but here is the actual science. There is no such thing as material matter. It takes energy to cast something into fully visible 'solid' form (still a hologram). So as shown in Kirlian photography (spectrography) that shows the aura of things, you can see that even if you cut part of a leaf away, there is still an energy you normally won't see with your eyes that casts out the 'solid' form of that thing within the simulation that clearly appears through the camera. That part of the leaf is "gone", yet the energy field of that shape is still there. See video below: 👉 The Phantom Leaf in Kirlian Photography. The phantom part of the leaf is the plasma body, or 'ghost' energy field, and the physical leaf is merely a holographic expression of what the thing should appear as. These two things, while totally integrated normally, are not dependent on each other to still exist. Ghosts that are disembodied still have their energetic light body essence; they just can't assemble the 'physical' part of it anymore. So they can't touch things, taste things, or experience life, all they can do now is watch it around them. That is, unless they go to the astral fields where they can materialize there, but those are artificial worlds the invader races have set up as honeypot traps for the disembodied to now produce loosh for them, just as they are doing to manifest beings here in the looking glass simulation. You built this simulation called a time matrix. Other fractals of your collective of Prime Creator (you can think of as bratty siblings) came along and set up a new simulation nested within this 'organic' one in order to trick you so they can harvest your energy. This is in the way of your light body power, as well as in using you to funnel vast wealth to them through taxes, taxes and more taxes. They also eat your kids (more taxes). The way the hologram is actually projected around you is through projector lenses we call our eyes we think allow us to ‘see’. In reality it is our pineal gland that sees and our eyes merely project our inclusion into the shared reality scape before us so others can see us. And while that might seem impossible to understand, this is how anything within the simulation materializes. Eyes are not camera lenses as touched on above. The optical lenses that stack up inside the pupil are the same convex-to-concave as projection lenses are arranged. They literally cannot 'see' something, they can only project images. In quantum science experiments, such as the Double Slit, it is proven that the aether does not materialize before you the simulation of molecular 'matter' unless the scientist is looking at the experiment. Then that experiment only functions according to the preconception of that particular scientist. The same test run by two different people reveals two different actions. That's because these are two different realities. Yours and theirs. We all live in our own unique worlds, and agree on things like 'leaves are green'. But in reality, my green might be your purple. It is a shared reality field made up of different but complimentary worlds. How you really see is through the 3rd eye pineal gland as mentioned earlier. Naturally the ancients knew this eons ago -now engraved, painted and depicted all across ancient Egypt-. It has the clear ability to see 360 degrees around you what it is you expect to see in that precise spot on earth because the spacetime fabric is holding the colors, shapes and outlines of every leaf and tree and blade of grass that is supposed to be "there" according to all the other people around you that are projecting the same image in the same designated spot, and because you are now looking in that direction, you can see it. Your pineal gland now sends that live image down to your heart with your own body now blended into that same picture where you weren't previously standing, because you don't actually have a body to 'stand' anywhere. The heart hears that signal, then reduces it to a song that pulsates out to all the aether microcrystals around you and suddenly your image will be imprinted or outlined in the air where the spacetime fabric holds your plasma field. The aether particles that hold this shape in the spacetime fabric are called X and Y bosons (also called W and Z bosons, depending on the white paper) that hold the square points within each pixel of the 'fabric' that Higgs bosons now light up according to where that leaf is supposed to be. The Higgs boson is YOUR projected holographic beam. At the same time your pineal gland sends the signal to the heart to alert the aether to your 'reality' of joining the shared reality field, now it also sends a signal through your optic nerve (optic fiber) that connects in a 45 degree angle from your pineal gland to your projector lenses and completes the 'solid' image of your body inside the spacetime fabric halo that's already there thanks to your heart. You are the Higgs boson science calls the god particle. What your eyes cast out before you is merely the holographic insertion of your own body as it interacts within the projection, making it seem like a solid, material version of your body now walking, and interacting with, the rest of the projected holograms as displayed by the spacetime fabric. In case you didn’t think the spacetime fabric is a ‘real’ thing, here is actual photographs taken of our invisible projector screens by scientists at CERN. Just because this is advanced holographic technology doesn't mean it cannot possibly work in such an unheard-of way. Remember, the spacetime fabric has to be triangulated, just like 3D holographic projections, in order for it to show you a fluid, 3D moving image. That triangulation is the X vector boson, the Y gauge boson and you, the Higgs boson. Three points of consciousness working together to project or 'insert' you into the holodeck. Like you, each fractal of Prime Creator around you are all projecting themselves into that shared field, so it makes it feel like this is a real-time, physical, place. But if you ask quantum physics if a falling tree makes a sound in the forest but no one is around to hear it, they will tell you not only does it not make a sound, the forest literally does not exist until a sentient being casts it into reality. The same can be said about you. Unless you are walking down that sidewalk, your shoes aren’t clicking, making a sound as your heels hit the pavement. Plus the pavement won’t even be there if you don’t project it into reality and no one else is around. You will learn that science takes an adamant stance that there is no such thing as static matter. All things blink on and off at a super-fast rate that cannot be detected by the eye. This is the cadence of the spacetime fabric known as the FLASHLINE SEQUENCE that operates on a shared ‘drum beat’ to keep the simulation harmonically tuned we call the Schumann Resonance, 7.83Hz rhythm. When you intend to ‘walk’, you flash onto one spacetime fabric screen, you flash off for a brief moment, then a few inches ahead of where you just were, you flash on a 'forward' screen, giving the illusion you are traveling. The fire plug isn’t moving, so it appears like you are walking past it, giving you the sensation of actually walking from A to B. Each pixel of each spacetime fabric, sandwiched on top of each other as many as millions of sheets per inch, have a vector or IP address within the simulation. So the X and Y bosons holding the space of that pixel can be triangulated by scalar positioning by a scientist from anywhere in the world. Every vector and gauge boson and every pixel can be mapped from any other point within the simulation. We have those IP addresses, and when a time craft wants to go somewhere else, their destination is one of those pixels that will act as the zero point of the craft where it will suddenly appear next. Like you, the craft never moves, it simply resonates with a different vibration that is ‘over there’. But like your video screen you’re looking at now, all things exist on the same sheet of glass, depending on which spacetime fabric you want to see. YOU cast yourself onto the spacetime fabric, otherwise your holographic ‘body’ simply doesn’t exist. And THAT is done by your intent. That is why you can manifest any reality you want to see, as described in ‘The Secret’. If you WANT to see a different, or better reality, you merely have to think of that reality until you find yourself there. For more on this topic, see my articles: 👉 MANIFESTING YOUR GOALS 👉 CASTING THE APOCOLYPSE 👉 CASTING A BETTER REALITY On X, to search for my articles, simply type in the name of the piece, enter one space, then from: & my username in parenthesis such as shown here: MANIFESTING YOUR GOALS (from:iontecs_pemf) Off-site, you can look up any of my writings by through this link below for my other more than 100 recent articles and many thousands of comments on X, regularly updated thanks to Justin This message will only be seen by your eyes if not shared, and if you want to reference this article again later, you will need to cut and paste it in your own notes off line, as it will surely be erased. This is the most accurate translation of these events I am aware of at this time.

W.R. Schock, QBD

212,753 次观看 • 1 年前

FULL TRANSCRIPT OF ELON'S CYBERCAB AND ROBOVAN PRESENTATION 00:00 Welcome 01:16 Cybercab & Future of transportation 04:33 Cost 05:53 Timeline 07:13 Self-driving technology 10:05 Inductive charging 10:24 The cities of the future 11:04 Robovan 12:13 Optimus Welcome Welcome to the We, Robot party. We have quite a show for you tonight. I think you're going to like it. As you can see, I just arrived in the Robotaxi, the Cybercab. And there's 20 more where that came from. So they've been traveling, there's no people in them. As you can see, the car is just going by with no people. We have 50 fully autonomous cars here tonight. So you'll see model Y's and the Cybercabs, all driverless. You'll be able to take a ride in the Cybercab. There's no steering wheel or pedals. So I hope this goes well, we'll find out. You see a lot of sci-fi movies where the future is dark and dismal, where it's not a future you want to be in. So, you know, I love Blade Runner, but I don't know if we want that future. We want that duster he's wearing, but not the bleak apocalypse. We want to have a fun, exciting future that, if you could look in a crystal ball and see the future, you'd be like, yes, I wish I could be there now. That's what we want. Cybercab & Future of transportation So, when we think about transport today, there's a lot of pain that we take for granted, that we think is normal. Like having to drive around LA in 3 hours of traffic. Yeah, people that live in LA, I mean, you know, try to get from Pasadena to El Segundo during rush hour. You can fly to another city faster than you can get to LA. And you have to drive the whole way, unless you're in a Tesla. Of course, our Tesla already does quite well at this supervised self-driving. So, supervised full self-driving is actually working quite well. I'm sure there's people in the crowd who are using that. So, we'll move from supervised full self-driving to unsupervised full self-driving where the car, you could fall asleep and wake up at your destination. But there's also a challenge for a lot of people that cars cost too much. I mean, when you factor in everything that goes into a car and the car insurance and the car payments, storage of the car, it's very expensive. You say, like, how many hours a week are cars used? Your average passenger car is only used about 10 hours a week out of 168 hours. So, the vast majority of the time cars are just doing nothing. But if they're autonomous, they could be used, I don't know, five times more, maybe ten times more. So you could actually, for the same car, would have five times as much value, maybe ten times as much value. There's 168 hours in the week, and like I said, only ten of them are used for driving. And then, a bunch of those hours are looking for a parking spot, which can be pretty annoying at times. So, with autonomy, you get your time back. This is a very big deal. So it's not just, it'll save lives, like a lot of lives and prevent injuries. I think we'll see autonomous cars become ten times safer than a human. I mean, if you think of times past where there used to be an elevator operator in every elevator but once in a while, they get tired and accidentally shear somebody in half. Now, we have automated elevators. You just get an elevator and you press a button and you don't even think about it and it just takes you to the floor. And if you did see an elevator operator with a big relay switch, you'd be like, that's weird. That's how cars will be. And it's not just the lives saved in injuries, but if you think about the cumulative time that people spend in a car and the time that they will get back that they can now spend, well, I guess, on their phones or watching a movie or doing work or whatever you want to do you can think of the car in autonomous world as being like just little lounge. You're just sitting in a comfortable little lounge and you can do whatever you want while you're in this comfortable little lounge. And when you get out, you will be at your destination. So, yeah, it's gonna be awesome. Cost So, in fact, I think the cost of autonomous transport will be so low that you can think of it like individualized mass transit. The average cost of a bus per mile for a city, not the ticket price, because that is subsidized, but the average price is about a dollar a mile, whereas the cost of Cybercab we think probably over time, the operating cost is probably going to be around twenty cents a mile. Including taxes and everything else, it probably ends up being 30 or 40 cents a mile. And you will be able to buy one. And we expect the cost to be below $30,000. And I think there'll be an interesting business model where, let's say somebody is an Uber or Lyft driver today where they can actually sort of manage a fleet of cars and like, sort of manage, I don't know, 10, 20 cars and just take care of them. Like a shepherd tends their flock. You have a little flock of cars and you're the shepherd and you take care of your flock of cars. I think that would be pretty cool. I think it's going to be a glorious future. It's going to be really something special. Timeline We do expect actually to start fully autonomous unsupervised FSD in Texas and California next year. And that's obviously, that's with the Model 3 and Model Y. And then we expect to be in production with the Cybercab, which is really highly optimized for autonomous transport in probably, I tend to be a little optimistic with time frames, but in 2026. So, yeah, before 2027, let me put it that way. And we'll make this vehicle in very high volume. But well, before that, you will experience a robotic taxi via the Model 3 and Model Y program and model S and X, too. But the Model 3 and Y will achieve unsupervised full self-driving with permission, in wherever regulators essentially approve it. In the US, and then to follow outside the US. And Cybertruck, too. All our cars are basically, all cars that we make. Let's not get nuanced here. Self-driving technology One of the reasons why the computer can be so much better than a person is that we have millions of cars that are training on driving. It's like living millions of lives simultaneously and seeing very unusual situations that a person in their entire lifetime would not see. With that amount of training data, it's obviously going to be much better than what a human could be because you can't live a million lives. And it's also, it can see in all directions simultaneously and it doesn't get tired or text or any of those things. So, it will naturally be, like I said 10, 20, 30 times safer than a human, just for all those reasons. And I want to emphasize that the solution that we have is, AI and vision. So, there's no expensive equipment needed. The Model 3 and Model Y and S and X that we make today will be capable of full autonomy, unsupervised. And that means that our cost of producing the vehicle is low. Now, we are going to actually over-spec the computer for the Cybercab. So, our AI 5 computer will be somewhat over-spec'd because I think there's actually also an opportunity, sort of like an Amazon Web Services, where if the car is driving for 50 hours a week, there's still over 100 hours left and there's a potential there to have a massive amount of distributed inference compute, where if you've got like a fleet of 100 million vehicles and a kilowatt of efficient inference compute, you have 100 gigawatts of compute, which is really quite substantial. And if it's there, you might as well use it so that I think will make sense. So, our autonomous future is here. As I said, we've got 50 Teslas driving autonomously. We're trying to give you a sense of what cities will be like in the future. And when you get in, you'll see like, it's really quite a wild experience to just be in a car with no steering wheel, no pedals, no controls, and it feels great. So we have enough vehicles here, so everyone should be able to try it out and experience the set that we've built here. It's a very big set. So it's like really we've used I don't know, 20, 30 acres or something like that. It's really big. So, it goes on, the ride's long. And we set it up to feel like a ride, like a park ride. So, it'll be cool and you'll get to experience it tonight. Inductive charging Something we're also doing is and it's really high time we did this is inductive charging. So, the robotaxi has no plug. It just goes over the inductive charger and charges. So, yeah, it's kind of how it should be. The cities of the future One of the things that is really interesting is how will this affect the cities that we live in. And when you drive around a city, or when the car drives you around the city, you'll see there's a lot of parking lots. There's parking lots everywhere, parking garages. What would happen if you have an autonomous world is that you can now turn parking lots into parks. And so, from we're taking the inglot out of parking lot. You're welcome. So, there's a lot of opportunity to create green space in the cities that we live in. So, like, that would be quite fantastic. Robovan Oh, and also, what happens if you need a vehicle that is bigger than a Model Y? The Robovan. We're going to make this and it's going to look like that. Now, can you imagine going down the streets and you see this coming towards you? That'd be sick. So this can carry up to 20 people, and it can also transport goods. You can configure it for goods transport within a city. Or transport of up to 20 people at a time. The Robovan is what's gonna solve for high density. If you want to take a sports team somewhere or you're looking to really get the cost of travel down to, I don't know, 5, 10 cents a mile, then you can use the Robovan. One of the things we want to do, and we've seen this with the Cybertruck, is we want to change the look of the roads. The future should look like the future. Optimus Speaking of robots. Everything we've developed for our cars, the batteries, power electronics, the advanced motors, gearboxes, the software, the AI inference computer, it all actually applies to a humanoid robot. The same techniques. It's just a robot with arms and legs instead of a robot with wheels. We've made a lot of progress with Optimus. And as you can see, we started up with someone in a robot suit. And then, we've progressed dramatically, year after year. So, if you extrapolate this, you're really going to have something spectacular, something that anyone could own. So, you can have your own personal R2-D2-C3PO. And I think at scale, this would cost something like, I don't know, $20,000, $30,000, probably less than a car is my prediction, long-term. It'll take us a minute to get to the long term. But fundamentally, at scale, the Optimus robot, you should be able to buy an Optimus robot for, I think, probably $20,000 to $30,000, long-term. And what can it do? It'll basically do anything you want. It can be a teacher or babysit your kids, it can walk your dog, mow your lawn, get the groceries, just be your friend, serve drinks whatever you can think of, it will do. And, yeah, it's going to be awesome. I think this will be the biggest product ever of any kind, because I think everyone of the 8 billion people of Earth, I think everyone's going to want their Optimus buddy. And there's going to be maybe two. And then, they'll be producing products and services. I predict, actually, provided we address risks of digital superintelligence, 80% probability of good outcome, look on the bright side, the cup is 80% full, the cost of products and services will decline dramatically. And basically, anyone will be able to have any products and services they want. It will be an age of abundance the likes of which people have not, almost no one has envisioned. It will be something special. So now, one of the things we wanted to show tonight was that Optimus is not a canned video. It's not walled off. The Optimus robots will walk among you. Please, please be nice to the Optimus robots. You'll be able to walk right up to them and they'll serve drinks at the bar. I mean, it's a wild experience just to have humanoid robots and they're there, you're just in front of you. So yeah, with that, let's party!
15:37

FULL TRANSCRIPT OF ELON'S CYBERCAB AND ROBOVAN PRESENTATION 00:00 Welcome 01:16 Cybercab & Future of transportation 04:33 Cost 05:53 Timeline 07:13 Self-driving technology 10:05 Inductive charging 10:24 The cities of the future 11:04 Robovan 12:13 Optimus Welcome Welcome to the We, Robot party. We have quite a show for you tonight. I think you're going to like it. As you can see, I just arrived in the Robotaxi, the Cybercab. And there's 20 more where that came from. So they've been traveling, there's no people in them. As you can see, the car is just going by with no people. We have 50 fully autonomous cars here tonight. So you'll see model Y's and the Cybercabs, all driverless. You'll be able to take a ride in the Cybercab. There's no steering wheel or pedals. So I hope this goes well, we'll find out. You see a lot of sci-fi movies where the future is dark and dismal, where it's not a future you want to be in. So, you know, I love Blade Runner, but I don't know if we want that future. We want that duster he's wearing, but not the bleak apocalypse. We want to have a fun, exciting future that, if you could look in a crystal ball and see the future, you'd be like, yes, I wish I could be there now. That's what we want. Cybercab & Future of transportation So, when we think about transport today, there's a lot of pain that we take for granted, that we think is normal. Like having to drive around LA in 3 hours of traffic. Yeah, people that live in LA, I mean, you know, try to get from Pasadena to El Segundo during rush hour. You can fly to another city faster than you can get to LA. And you have to drive the whole way, unless you're in a Tesla. Of course, our Tesla already does quite well at this supervised self-driving. So, supervised full self-driving is actually working quite well. I'm sure there's people in the crowd who are using that. So, we'll move from supervised full self-driving to unsupervised full self-driving where the car, you could fall asleep and wake up at your destination. But there's also a challenge for a lot of people that cars cost too much. I mean, when you factor in everything that goes into a car and the car insurance and the car payments, storage of the car, it's very expensive. You say, like, how many hours a week are cars used? Your average passenger car is only used about 10 hours a week out of 168 hours. So, the vast majority of the time cars are just doing nothing. But if they're autonomous, they could be used, I don't know, five times more, maybe ten times more. So you could actually, for the same car, would have five times as much value, maybe ten times as much value. There's 168 hours in the week, and like I said, only ten of them are used for driving. And then, a bunch of those hours are looking for a parking spot, which can be pretty annoying at times. So, with autonomy, you get your time back. This is a very big deal. So it's not just, it'll save lives, like a lot of lives and prevent injuries. I think we'll see autonomous cars become ten times safer than a human. I mean, if you think of times past where there used to be an elevator operator in every elevator but once in a while, they get tired and accidentally shear somebody in half. Now, we have automated elevators. You just get an elevator and you press a button and you don't even think about it and it just takes you to the floor. And if you did see an elevator operator with a big relay switch, you'd be like, that's weird. That's how cars will be. And it's not just the lives saved in injuries, but if you think about the cumulative time that people spend in a car and the time that they will get back that they can now spend, well, I guess, on their phones or watching a movie or doing work or whatever you want to do you can think of the car in autonomous world as being like just little lounge. You're just sitting in a comfortable little lounge and you can do whatever you want while you're in this comfortable little lounge. And when you get out, you will be at your destination. So, yeah, it's gonna be awesome. Cost So, in fact, I think the cost of autonomous transport will be so low that you can think of it like individualized mass transit. The average cost of a bus per mile for a city, not the ticket price, because that is subsidized, but the average price is about a dollar a mile, whereas the cost of Cybercab we think probably over time, the operating cost is probably going to be around twenty cents a mile. Including taxes and everything else, it probably ends up being 30 or 40 cents a mile. And you will be able to buy one. And we expect the cost to be below $30,000. And I think there'll be an interesting business model where, let's say somebody is an Uber or Lyft driver today where they can actually sort of manage a fleet of cars and like, sort of manage, I don't know, 10, 20 cars and just take care of them. Like a shepherd tends their flock. You have a little flock of cars and you're the shepherd and you take care of your flock of cars. I think that would be pretty cool. I think it's going to be a glorious future. It's going to be really something special. Timeline We do expect actually to start fully autonomous unsupervised FSD in Texas and California next year. And that's obviously, that's with the Model 3 and Model Y. And then we expect to be in production with the Cybercab, which is really highly optimized for autonomous transport in probably, I tend to be a little optimistic with time frames, but in 2026. So, yeah, before 2027, let me put it that way. And we'll make this vehicle in very high volume. But well, before that, you will experience a robotic taxi via the Model 3 and Model Y program and model S and X, too. But the Model 3 and Y will achieve unsupervised full self-driving with permission, in wherever regulators essentially approve it. In the US, and then to follow outside the US. And Cybertruck, too. All our cars are basically, all cars that we make. Let's not get nuanced here. Self-driving technology One of the reasons why the computer can be so much better than a person is that we have millions of cars that are training on driving. It's like living millions of lives simultaneously and seeing very unusual situations that a person in their entire lifetime would not see. With that amount of training data, it's obviously going to be much better than what a human could be because you can't live a million lives. And it's also, it can see in all directions simultaneously and it doesn't get tired or text or any of those things. So, it will naturally be, like I said 10, 20, 30 times safer than a human, just for all those reasons. And I want to emphasize that the solution that we have is, AI and vision. So, there's no expensive equipment needed. The Model 3 and Model Y and S and X that we make today will be capable of full autonomy, unsupervised. And that means that our cost of producing the vehicle is low. Now, we are going to actually over-spec the computer for the Cybercab. So, our AI 5 computer will be somewhat over-spec'd because I think there's actually also an opportunity, sort of like an Amazon Web Services, where if the car is driving for 50 hours a week, there's still over 100 hours left and there's a potential there to have a massive amount of distributed inference compute, where if you've got like a fleet of 100 million vehicles and a kilowatt of efficient inference compute, you have 100 gigawatts of compute, which is really quite substantial. And if it's there, you might as well use it so that I think will make sense. So, our autonomous future is here. As I said, we've got 50 Teslas driving autonomously. We're trying to give you a sense of what cities will be like in the future. And when you get in, you'll see like, it's really quite a wild experience to just be in a car with no steering wheel, no pedals, no controls, and it feels great. So we have enough vehicles here, so everyone should be able to try it out and experience the set that we've built here. It's a very big set. So it's like really we've used I don't know, 20, 30 acres or something like that. It's really big. So, it goes on, the ride's long. And we set it up to feel like a ride, like a park ride. So, it'll be cool and you'll get to experience it tonight. Inductive charging Something we're also doing is and it's really high time we did this is inductive charging. So, the robotaxi has no plug. It just goes over the inductive charger and charges. So, yeah, it's kind of how it should be. The cities of the future One of the things that is really interesting is how will this affect the cities that we live in. And when you drive around a city, or when the car drives you around the city, you'll see there's a lot of parking lots. There's parking lots everywhere, parking garages. What would happen if you have an autonomous world is that you can now turn parking lots into parks. And so, from we're taking the inglot out of parking lot. You're welcome. So, there's a lot of opportunity to create green space in the cities that we live in. So, like, that would be quite fantastic. Robovan Oh, and also, what happens if you need a vehicle that is bigger than a Model Y? The Robovan. We're going to make this and it's going to look like that. Now, can you imagine going down the streets and you see this coming towards you? That'd be sick. So this can carry up to 20 people, and it can also transport goods. You can configure it for goods transport within a city. Or transport of up to 20 people at a time. The Robovan is what's gonna solve for high density. If you want to take a sports team somewhere or you're looking to really get the cost of travel down to, I don't know, 5, 10 cents a mile, then you can use the Robovan. One of the things we want to do, and we've seen this with the Cybertruck, is we want to change the look of the roads. The future should look like the future. Optimus Speaking of robots. Everything we've developed for our cars, the batteries, power electronics, the advanced motors, gearboxes, the software, the AI inference computer, it all actually applies to a humanoid robot. The same techniques. It's just a robot with arms and legs instead of a robot with wheels. We've made a lot of progress with Optimus. And as you can see, we started up with someone in a robot suit. And then, we've progressed dramatically, year after year. So, if you extrapolate this, you're really going to have something spectacular, something that anyone could own. So, you can have your own personal R2-D2-C3PO. And I think at scale, this would cost something like, I don't know, $20,000, $30,000, probably less than a car is my prediction, long-term. It'll take us a minute to get to the long term. But fundamentally, at scale, the Optimus robot, you should be able to buy an Optimus robot for, I think, probably $20,000 to $30,000, long-term. And what can it do? It'll basically do anything you want. It can be a teacher or babysit your kids, it can walk your dog, mow your lawn, get the groceries, just be your friend, serve drinks whatever you can think of, it will do. And, yeah, it's going to be awesome. I think this will be the biggest product ever of any kind, because I think everyone of the 8 billion people of Earth, I think everyone's going to want their Optimus buddy. And there's going to be maybe two. And then, they'll be producing products and services. I predict, actually, provided we address risks of digital superintelligence, 80% probability of good outcome, look on the bright side, the cup is 80% full, the cost of products and services will decline dramatically. And basically, anyone will be able to have any products and services they want. It will be an age of abundance the likes of which people have not, almost no one has envisioned. It will be something special. So now, one of the things we wanted to show tonight was that Optimus is not a canned video. It's not walled off. The Optimus robots will walk among you. Please, please be nice to the Optimus robots. You'll be able to walk right up to them and they'll serve drinks at the bar. I mean, it's a wild experience just to have humanoid robots and they're there, you're just in front of you. So yeah, with that, let's party!

Mario Nawfal

241,051 次观看 • 1 年前

I’ve made a short film. Look at the things around you: doors, bins, staircases, furniture, railings, doorhandles, windows. Do you like how they look, or not? Modern design has become boring, but it doesn’t have to be this way. The word “beautiful” is overused. We don’t need “beautiful” lamps, bus stops, and water fountains – we just need lamps, bus stops, and water fountains that are interesting, that actually mean something. Or, at the very least, not boring. Because the aesthetics of architecture and urban design aren’t just a bonus; they totally change how we think, feel, and behave. Boring environments make us more stressed and less productive; they erode our sense of community; they make us sadder, less trusting, and lonelier. A boring world is one where we spend even more time online and where our addictions are even harder to battle. The Problem There is global, widespread dissatisfaction with how the world looks. In this film, and the series it will lead to, we want to investigate that feeling and give it a voice. The point isn’t that we should return to the past or get rid of modernism. It’s about learning from the past in order to improve the present, and about giving the public what they very clearly want, which isn’t the eradication of modernism but the co-existence of modernism AND traditionalism. Just look where tourists go, where they take their photos, and that tells you everything you need to know about what most people find interesting or beautiful. And look at where people go on holiday. It’s always to cities filled with old architecture and design, with churches and mosques and palaces, with charming little alleyways and stone staircases and wrought-iron railings. Of the world’s fifty most visited buildings, only four were made in the 20th century, and they’re all museums or memorials. There’s a reason why posts about this go viral online all the time. Regardless of why the change happened, it is clearly the case that we no longer make things how we used to. People are rightly confused by the fact that old lamp posts (to take the example we focus on in the film) are usually so pretty, while modern ones are usually so boring. Some people say this is just an example of survivorship bias… and they’re mostly correct. But that’s the whole point! Saying old buildings are usually prettier than modern buildings is not to say that architecture used to be better, or that the past was better. It is simply to say that certain kinds of buildings, because they have been preserved, are good examples of what people like most. In which case... shouldn't we try to design at least some buildings in a way that we know people like? A Unifying Cause Everybody, from all sides of the political spectrum and all backgrounds, stands to benefit from a world that is designed more thoughtfully and imaginatively. The world could be such a colourful, meaningful, and thrilling place! So this isn’t about left versus right or conservatism versus progressivism; it’s about making our world a more interesting and meaningful place to live in. This should be a unifying cause, because everybody loses out when our homes and cities are badly designed. I want this film to unite people who think they’re on opposite sides, and to create a consensus that we need to change our approach to how we design our buildings and the objects – benches, bus stops, bins, lamp posts, aircon units – that fill our cities. The Importance of Details We are incredibly rich and have a sprawling choice of shows to stream, phones to buy, or shoes to wear… but everything feels more and more generic all the time. If you want to understand a society, don’t listen to what it says about itself – look at what it creates. You can learn everything about the Victorians – the good and the bad – just by looking at their lamp posts. And what do the ordinary details of the modern world say about us? That we are technologically advanced, very efficient… and care more about making money, about making things as quickly and cheaply as possible, than making our world an enjoyable place to actually live in. It’s important to learn about why and how things have changed, but that’s for another time. The first step is establishing that the public aren’t happy with modern architecture and design, and that something needs to be done. But what we need isn’t a total revival of so-called ‘traditionalism’; the truth is that traditionalism and modernism can (and should) co-exist. The trouble right now is that we only have one, and that people are tired of it. The Power of Noticing But this film (and the series it will, all being well, lead to) is about more than the specific argument it presents. Above all it’s about a way of seeing the world around us, a way of noticing and thinking. “How you do anything is how you do everything.” That is probably true, and it also applies to whole societies, not just individuals; a single doorbell implies everything else about the whole socio-economic and political system that gave rise to its creation. And, beyond being merely “useful”, the ability to notice details makes the world a richer place to live in, and life a richer thing to lead. This is what the film is about, more than anything: the power and joy of noticing. A Bigger Project This short film is just the beginning. We want to make a full series about the history of art and architecture, both for their own sake and also to see what we can learn about life in the twenty-first century and how to improve it. To keep updated you can join our email list over at our website, linked in the reply below. Final Words You can watch the film here on X, or over on YouTube, also linked in the reply below. So… this is where the dream begins, the dream of a new series and the dream of a more charming, more interesting, more meaningful modern world. Spread the word.
15:36

I’ve made a short film. Look at the things around you: doors, bins, staircases, furniture, railings, doorhandles, windows. Do you like how they look, or not? Modern design has become boring, but it doesn’t have to be this way. The word “beautiful” is overused. We don’t need “beautiful” lamps, bus stops, and water fountains – we just need lamps, bus stops, and water fountains that are interesting, that actually mean something. Or, at the very least, not boring. Because the aesthetics of architecture and urban design aren’t just a bonus; they totally change how we think, feel, and behave. Boring environments make us more stressed and less productive; they erode our sense of community; they make us sadder, less trusting, and lonelier. A boring world is one where we spend even more time online and where our addictions are even harder to battle. The Problem There is global, widespread dissatisfaction with how the world looks. In this film, and the series it will lead to, we want to investigate that feeling and give it a voice. The point isn’t that we should return to the past or get rid of modernism. It’s about learning from the past in order to improve the present, and about giving the public what they very clearly want, which isn’t the eradication of modernism but the co-existence of modernism AND traditionalism. Just look where tourists go, where they take their photos, and that tells you everything you need to know about what most people find interesting or beautiful. And look at where people go on holiday. It’s always to cities filled with old architecture and design, with churches and mosques and palaces, with charming little alleyways and stone staircases and wrought-iron railings. Of the world’s fifty most visited buildings, only four were made in the 20th century, and they’re all museums or memorials. There’s a reason why posts about this go viral online all the time. Regardless of why the change happened, it is clearly the case that we no longer make things how we used to. People are rightly confused by the fact that old lamp posts (to take the example we focus on in the film) are usually so pretty, while modern ones are usually so boring. Some people say this is just an example of survivorship bias… and they’re mostly correct. But that’s the whole point! Saying old buildings are usually prettier than modern buildings is not to say that architecture used to be better, or that the past was better. It is simply to say that certain kinds of buildings, because they have been preserved, are good examples of what people like most. In which case... shouldn't we try to design at least some buildings in a way that we know people like? A Unifying Cause Everybody, from all sides of the political spectrum and all backgrounds, stands to benefit from a world that is designed more thoughtfully and imaginatively. The world could be such a colourful, meaningful, and thrilling place! So this isn’t about left versus right or conservatism versus progressivism; it’s about making our world a more interesting and meaningful place to live in. This should be a unifying cause, because everybody loses out when our homes and cities are badly designed. I want this film to unite people who think they’re on opposite sides, and to create a consensus that we need to change our approach to how we design our buildings and the objects – benches, bus stops, bins, lamp posts, aircon units – that fill our cities. The Importance of Details We are incredibly rich and have a sprawling choice of shows to stream, phones to buy, or shoes to wear… but everything feels more and more generic all the time. If you want to understand a society, don’t listen to what it says about itself – look at what it creates. You can learn everything about the Victorians – the good and the bad – just by looking at their lamp posts. And what do the ordinary details of the modern world say about us? That we are technologically advanced, very efficient… and care more about making money, about making things as quickly and cheaply as possible, than making our world an enjoyable place to actually live in. It’s important to learn about why and how things have changed, but that’s for another time. The first step is establishing that the public aren’t happy with modern architecture and design, and that something needs to be done. But what we need isn’t a total revival of so-called ‘traditionalism’; the truth is that traditionalism and modernism can (and should) co-exist. The trouble right now is that we only have one, and that people are tired of it. The Power of Noticing But this film (and the series it will, all being well, lead to) is about more than the specific argument it presents. Above all it’s about a way of seeing the world around us, a way of noticing and thinking. “How you do anything is how you do everything.” That is probably true, and it also applies to whole societies, not just individuals; a single doorbell implies everything else about the whole socio-economic and political system that gave rise to its creation. And, beyond being merely “useful”, the ability to notice details makes the world a richer place to live in, and life a richer thing to lead. This is what the film is about, more than anything: the power and joy of noticing. A Bigger Project This short film is just the beginning. We want to make a full series about the history of art and architecture, both for their own sake and also to see what we can learn about life in the twenty-first century and how to improve it. To keep updated you can join our email list over at our website, linked in the reply below. Final Words You can watch the film here on X, or over on YouTube, also linked in the reply below. So… this is where the dream begins, the dream of a new series and the dream of a more charming, more interesting, more meaningful modern world. Spread the word.

The Cultural Tutor

2,746,771 次观看 • 10 个月前

GM Mayor Andy Burnham’s so-called ‘limited’ Assurance Review into the gang rape of young White girls in Oldham, better described as an attempted cover-up of the cover-up, was published on 20th June 2022. Refusing to accept their whitewash, I took to YouTube the day after (June 21, 2022), to deliver the first of my debriefs, exposing the glaring inconsistencies in their narrative. I'd spent 24 hours examining the 200+ page document. The Fight for a Public Inquiry During the live transmission, I systematically dismantled the review’s contradictions, making it clear that the fight for a full Public Inquiry had to continue. At that point, nearly everyone else had either resigned themselves to never uncovering the truth or accused me of lying. Yet, I persisted. It took until January 2025 - over two and a half years later - for Andy Burnham to finally admit his so-called Assurance Review had failed to reveal the truth. The Smear Campaign Realising what I was doing, and all previous attempts to silence me had failed, The Labour Party campaigners orchestrated a new smear operation. They recruited a survivor to work against me, aiming to assemble a group of young women to falsely accuse me of grooming and rape. The survivor’s role was to lend credibility to these fabricated allegations. A so-called ‘journalist,’ Neil Wilby, aligned with Jim McMahon OBE MP, was enlisted to amplify the false narrative, ensuring it gained traction. Both Wilby and McMahon (now a government minister) openly discussed their plans to silence me. By now you know I'm not in the business of lying. This is how desperate they got. This actually happened. They recruited a grooming gang survivor to coach a group of girls to make malicious allegations against me of child rape. Censorship and the Mayor’s Office Despite knowing the consequences of challenging the official story - while also awaiting trial due to a series of malicious prosecutions orchestrated by Greater Manchester Police to silence me - I refused to back down. I shared my analysis and a summary report. Almost immediately, it was taken down by YouTube following a ‘defamation’ complaint. A national inquiry would confirm whether the Mayor’s office played a role in this censorship, or indeed, in any of the attempts to maliciously prosecute me. It is already confirmed that both senior Labour politicians including Oldham Council leader Arooj Shah and her Council repeatedly fabricated evidence to try and have me prosecuted and imprisoned. The Evidence They Tried to Erase Here is the link to the original broadcast. You’ll see for yourself - it has been removed in the UK. Their attempts to silence me failed to stop me. I’ve re-uploaded the video here on X for those who want to hear what they tried to bury. You'll see a younger, less grey and wrinkled version of me, setting out the evidence. In the end, as with all such cases where our government has attempted to cover-up serious injustices, it is only ever the actions of ordinary people that force a reckoning. Sadly, my mother died before I was able to clear my name. I also know that I will never work again in the field I am an expert in because I spoke out against the gang rape of little White girls by groups of Pakistani men. Please Help Me Finish This. If you are coming to me new, my name is Raja Miah MBE. I am responsible for leading a six year campaign that blew the lid off how Labour Party politicians were involved in protecting Pakistani Rape Gangs. You won’t find me on any news channel in the UK nor featured in the legacy press. My work is free for all. No paywalls. No restrictions. No exclusions of any kind. Unfortunately, our numbers aren’t where they need to be. We are up against a powerful machine: legacy media, politicians, police and public officials working together to bury the scale of this cover-up. To fight back, we need to grow. My goal is simple - just 10 new newsletter subscribers a day. Through my newsletter, I document everything in detail - the evidence, the investigations, and the fight for justice. 100% free, though if you can afford to subscribe and financially support me, it costs as little as 75p a week or £30 for the year. 👉 If a monthly subscription isn’t possible, a one-off contribution makes a difference. Every penny goes towards keeping this work alive. 👉 👉 We will not secure a National Inquiry without numbers, without strength, without your support. Please stand with me. 👉 Raja 🙏
53:11

GM Mayor Andy Burnham’s so-called ‘limited’ Assurance Review into the gang rape of young White girls in Oldham, better described as an attempted cover-up of the cover-up, was published on 20th June 2022. Refusing to accept their whitewash, I took to YouTube the day after (June 21, 2022), to deliver the first of my debriefs, exposing the glaring inconsistencies in their narrative. I'd spent 24 hours examining the 200+ page document. The Fight for a Public Inquiry During the live transmission, I systematically dismantled the review’s contradictions, making it clear that the fight for a full Public Inquiry had to continue. At that point, nearly everyone else had either resigned themselves to never uncovering the truth or accused me of lying. Yet, I persisted. It took until January 2025 - over two and a half years later - for Andy Burnham to finally admit his so-called Assurance Review had failed to reveal the truth. The Smear Campaign Realising what I was doing, and all previous attempts to silence me had failed, The Labour Party campaigners orchestrated a new smear operation. They recruited a survivor to work against me, aiming to assemble a group of young women to falsely accuse me of grooming and rape. The survivor’s role was to lend credibility to these fabricated allegations. A so-called ‘journalist,’ Neil Wilby, aligned with Jim McMahon OBE MP, was enlisted to amplify the false narrative, ensuring it gained traction. Both Wilby and McMahon (now a government minister) openly discussed their plans to silence me. By now you know I'm not in the business of lying. This is how desperate they got. This actually happened. They recruited a grooming gang survivor to coach a group of girls to make malicious allegations against me of child rape. Censorship and the Mayor’s Office Despite knowing the consequences of challenging the official story - while also awaiting trial due to a series of malicious prosecutions orchestrated by Greater Manchester Police to silence me - I refused to back down. I shared my analysis and a summary report. Almost immediately, it was taken down by YouTube following a ‘defamation’ complaint. A national inquiry would confirm whether the Mayor’s office played a role in this censorship, or indeed, in any of the attempts to maliciously prosecute me. It is already confirmed that both senior Labour politicians including Oldham Council leader Arooj Shah and her Council repeatedly fabricated evidence to try and have me prosecuted and imprisoned. The Evidence They Tried to Erase Here is the link to the original broadcast. You’ll see for yourself - it has been removed in the UK. Their attempts to silence me failed to stop me. I’ve re-uploaded the video here on X for those who want to hear what they tried to bury. You'll see a younger, less grey and wrinkled version of me, setting out the evidence. In the end, as with all such cases where our government has attempted to cover-up serious injustices, it is only ever the actions of ordinary people that force a reckoning. Sadly, my mother died before I was able to clear my name. I also know that I will never work again in the field I am an expert in because I spoke out against the gang rape of little White girls by groups of Pakistani men. Please Help Me Finish This. If you are coming to me new, my name is Raja Miah MBE. I am responsible for leading a six year campaign that blew the lid off how Labour Party politicians were involved in protecting Pakistani Rape Gangs. You won’t find me on any news channel in the UK nor featured in the legacy press. My work is free for all. No paywalls. No restrictions. No exclusions of any kind. Unfortunately, our numbers aren’t where they need to be. We are up against a powerful machine: legacy media, politicians, police and public officials working together to bury the scale of this cover-up. To fight back, we need to grow. My goal is simple - just 10 new newsletter subscribers a day. Through my newsletter, I document everything in detail - the evidence, the investigations, and the fight for justice. 100% free, though if you can afford to subscribe and financially support me, it costs as little as 75p a week or £30 for the year. 👉 If a monthly subscription isn’t possible, a one-off contribution makes a difference. Every penny goes towards keeping this work alive. 👉 👉 We will not secure a National Inquiry without numbers, without strength, without your support. Please stand with me. 👉 Raja 🙏

Raja Miah

158,721 次观看 • 1 年前

alright let’s do a class on nielsen ratings / witness a timeline murder? i’m about to spin the block. the programming insider screenshots below are for weds, march 31. Programming Insider is one of the few places that just posts the raw nielsen grid without spin. every demo every network every show laid out the way buyers sellers and network executives actually read it. it’s not a recap site it’s not opinion it’s the sheet and if you’re not reading the sheet you’re not actually talking about the same thing as the people making the decisions 730k and a 0.15 in adults 18–49 is a real number and it maps cleanly within the expected range. nobody serious disputes that. in the current environment you’re generally looking at: 0.10 ≈ 580k–610k 0.11 ≈ 600k–630k 0.12 ≈ 620k–660k 0.13 ≈ 650k–690k 0.14 ≈ 680k–720k 0.15 ≈ 710k–750k 0.16 ≈ 740k–790k 0.17 ≈ 780k–830k 0.18 ≈ 820k–880k 0.19 ≈ 860k–920k 0.20 ≈ 900k–960k the issue is how often people stop there and treat it like a conclusion instead of the starting point. because a single demo pulled out of context doesn’t tell you what kind of number it actually was what kind of audience it represents or what it means in a real marketplace start with the full AEW row because that’s the foundation. AEW on TBS for 121 minutes posted: 0.44 household rating 0.12 adults 18–34 0.15 adults 18–49 0.09 women 18–49 0.20 men 18–49 0.22 adults 25–54 0.13 women 25–54 0.30 men 25–54 0.10 persons 12–34 0.07 females 12–34 0.12 males 12–34 0.03 teens 12–17 730k total viewers 6th in adults 18–49 12th in total viewers that’s the entire result. not the tweet version not the clipped version not the one number people like to repeat. that full row is the reality and once you actually read it the first thing that matters is not the 0.15 it’s how that 0.15 is built 0.20 men 18–49 0.09 women 18–49 that’s not a subtle imbalance that’s the number. this is not a broad demo performance it’s a concentrated one. when one side of the demo is doing more than double the work of the other side you are not looking at wide audience adoption you are looking at a defined lane showing up consistently and that distinction is everything because certain faux authorities talk about 0.15 like it’s a universal currency when it’s not. a 0.15 built on something like 0.14 women and 0.16 men is a fundamentally different asset than a 0.15 built on 0.09 women and 0.20 men. one is balanced one is narrow. one has flexibility across advertisers scheduling and audience expansion the other is predictable reliable and capped this one is clearly the latter same story in 25–54 0.30 men 25–54 0.13 women 25–54 again more than double same structural dependence same ceiling implication and then you go younger and nothing changes 0.12 adults 18–34 0.10 persons 12–34 0.12 males 12–34 0.07 females 12–34 it’s the same shape repeated across demos which tells you this is not a one week anomaly it’s the product identity. stable consistent defined not expanding and that’s where the difference between narrow reliability and broad strategic heat actually shows up in the data this is reliable. the audience shows up. the profile is predictable. the show holds its lane it is not broad. it is not expanding. it is not signaling that new segments are coming into the tent and changing the ceiling of the property that’s not opinion that’s what the row says now zoom out to the actual cable landscape that night because this is where context starts to cut through the noise Hannity 0.50 NBA on ESPN 0.36 Jesse Watters Primetime 0.28 Gutfeld 0.25 The Source with Kaitlan Collins 0.18 AEW Dynamite 0.15 that’s the board. that’s the tiering. AEW is not competing with the leaders it’s sitting clearly below them in the next band the gap from 0.15 to 0.18 is real the gap from 0.15 to 0.25 is large the gap from 0.15 to 0.36 and 0.50 is massive and this is where people get sloppy because they use ranking to imply proximity when there isn’t any the placements are: 6th in adults 18–49 12th in total viewers those are good placements for a cable property they are not dominant placements and they are not close to dominant placements. 12th at 730k tells you exactly how much total audience is actually there across the full market not just the demo slice people like to highlight and that matters because scale still matters. total audience still matters. you don’t get to ignore it just because the demo is easier to weaponize quickly on the presidential address because this keeps getting dragged in like it explains something and it doesn’t a brief presidential address is not real competition it’s not counterprogramming it’s not sustained audience capture it’s a short interruption that hits every network at the same time. everyone gets disrupted nobody gets singled out. it doesn’t change relative positioning it doesn’t create winners or losers it’s just noise in the system and leaning on it is basically avoiding what the table actually shows same thing with hourly ranks 3rd in an hour 4th in an hour fine but relative to what. if the field is thin outside a few programs you can place well in a window and still be materially behind the actual leaders. a 0.15 does not become a 0.25 because it ranked 3rd it stays a 0.15 now zoom out even further and look at the broader tv ecosystem broadcast that same night is pulling 4M 5M viewers with broader demo balance. different ecosystem yes but it gives you scale perspective. cable is fragmented expectations are different a 0.15 can be a good cable number but that does not make it a market moving television number it makes it solid within its lane and that’s where most of the conversation should stop but it doesn’t because once you layer in actual market structure the ratings matter even less than people think they do the buyer universe is not theoretical it is already allocated high tier buyers netflix amazon apple all operate at 600k+ per telecast levels but only for global scalable franchise inventory netflix has already consolidated the global wwe backbone across raw international distribution and library. there is no incentive to layer overlapping wrestling inventory into that system amazon is deploying capital into nfl nba nascar and large scale league ecosystems. servicing ppv distribution is not the same thing as underwriting long term weekly rights. there is no mandate for niche weekly wrestling at scale apple is curating a premium global sports portfolio aligned with brand identity. nothing niche nothing polarizing nothing demo fragmented clears that filter mid tier buyers disney espn already has wwe premium live events and massive nfl nba and college football commitments. the wrestling lane is already defined at the tentpole level fox is concentrated on nfl and big ten with disciplined incremental spend and no mandate for a second wrestling property peacock is structurally tied into wwe across events and library footprint. that lane is occupied paramount plus max post merger is sitting on one of the heaviest combat sports portfolios in the market ufc at roughly 1.1b per year zuffa boxing pbr nfl afc that is category consolidation not exploration. any additional combat adjacent inventory has to clear duplication against that stack turner inside that same structure is no longer operating independently. it is part of a combined portfolio that already has a defined combat sports identity low tier buyers roku tubi vice are operating in the 150k–300k per telecast range and are not positioned to escalate into premium rights competition so when you actually map the landscape it’s not that buyers are hesitant it’s that lanes are already filled there is no real second bidder dynamic and once you remove the idea of competitive bidding the ratings stop functioning as leverage they become a utility metric now go back to the numbers 0.15 730k male heavy composition those are not bad numbers they are just not strong enough to override strategic redundancy inside a portfolio that already includes ufc and global wwe alignment across multiple platforms so the conversation shifts this is no longer what will the market pay this becomes what is this worth inside our existing portfolio can we fill two hours cheaper can we replicate the demo with studio shows shoulder programming unscripted if yes there is no leverage if no it stays but on controlled terms that’s the real decision tree and this is where the difference between narrow reliability and broad strategic heat becomes the entire story this is reliable inventory. it shows up every week it delivers a consistent demo it fills two hours it holds a lane it is not broad strategic heat. it does not expand the audience map it does not unlock new advertiser categories it does not create urgency across buyers it does not force capital to move and that’s not a criticism it’s a classification so the clean read is simple the number is real the audience is still there the composition is still narrow the placement is still upper middle and none of that on its own creates leverage in a market that is already structurally allocated this is a property negotiating inside someone else’s portfolio not across an open market and that leads to the only conclusion that actually matters once capital is already deployed across nfl nba ufc and global wwe distribution and once the high tier buyers are structurally filtered out this stops being a rights negotiation driven by ratings and becomes an internal portfolio decision driven by overlap cost efficiency and replacement value. at that point a steady 0.15 does not create leverage it defines the floor of what that two hour block is worth relative to everything else competing for the same capital and now add the part everyone either ignores or pretends doesn’t exist TKO is effectively sitting on ~100% of premium combat sports market share at scale when you look at UFC plus WWE across global distribution lanes. that’s not just another player in the category that is the category so when you’re talking about where AEW fits you’re not comparing it in a vacuum you’re comparing it against the most consolidated combat sports stack the business has ever seen and that stack isn’t just operating independently Ari Emanuel has been advising David Ellison for 15+ years that relationship matters because it shapes how these portfolios are thought about at the highest level. this isn’t random alignment this is long term strategic overlap between the people actually making decisions about where billions in rights fees go so when you layer that on top of a potential Paramount controlled WBD structure you’re not just dealing with ratings anymore you’re dealing with a fully informed portfolio strategy that already knows exactly what it values in combat sports and what it doesn’t and then you zoom all the way out to cultural positioning because this part matters more than people think Pat McAfee is in the main event at WrestleMania that’s not a throwaway detail that’s the signal that’s WWE extending into mainstream sports media personalities who already command massive audiences across multiple platforms and pulling them into the biggest event in the space that’s what broad strategic heat actually looks like not just a consistent demo number not just reliable weekly inventory but expansion into new audience layers new distribution touchpoints and new cultural relevance that travels outside the core base so when you put all of this together the picture gets even clearer AEW is stable AEW is reliable AEW fills a lane but it’s operating in a market where the category leader already controls the majority of premium combat IP the decision makers are aligned at the highest levels the buyer universe is structurally closed and the biggest player is actively expanding its cultural footprint beyond wrestling itself that’s the environment so yes a 0.15 matters. yes 730k matters the number isn’t fake the number isn’t terrible the number is specific it tells you exactly what the show is right now it tells you the core audience showed up it tells you that audience is heavily male it tells you women are materially underrepresented it tells you the show converts to about 730k it tells you where it sits on the night it tells you the audience shape hasn’t changed what it doesn’t tell you matters just as much it doesn’t tell you the audience is expanding it doesn’t tell you the show is broadening it doesn’t tell you the ceiling moved this was a good night for a show with a defined audience but none of it overrides the reality that this is being evaluated inside a system that already knows what “must have” looks like and right now that bar is being set somewhere else entirely cc: Dave Meltzer
6:23

alright let’s do a class on nielsen ratings / witness a timeline murder? i’m about to spin the block. the programming insider screenshots below are for weds, march 31. Programming Insider is one of the few places that just posts the raw nielsen grid without spin. every demo every network every show laid out the way buyers sellers and network executives actually read it. it’s not a recap site it’s not opinion it’s the sheet and if you’re not reading the sheet you’re not actually talking about the same thing as the people making the decisions 730k and a 0.15 in adults 18–49 is a real number and it maps cleanly within the expected range. nobody serious disputes that. in the current environment you’re generally looking at: 0.10 ≈ 580k–610k 0.11 ≈ 600k–630k 0.12 ≈ 620k–660k 0.13 ≈ 650k–690k 0.14 ≈ 680k–720k 0.15 ≈ 710k–750k 0.16 ≈ 740k–790k 0.17 ≈ 780k–830k 0.18 ≈ 820k–880k 0.19 ≈ 860k–920k 0.20 ≈ 900k–960k the issue is how often people stop there and treat it like a conclusion instead of the starting point. because a single demo pulled out of context doesn’t tell you what kind of number it actually was what kind of audience it represents or what it means in a real marketplace start with the full AEW row because that’s the foundation. AEW on TBS for 121 minutes posted: 0.44 household rating 0.12 adults 18–34 0.15 adults 18–49 0.09 women 18–49 0.20 men 18–49 0.22 adults 25–54 0.13 women 25–54 0.30 men 25–54 0.10 persons 12–34 0.07 females 12–34 0.12 males 12–34 0.03 teens 12–17 730k total viewers 6th in adults 18–49 12th in total viewers that’s the entire result. not the tweet version not the clipped version not the one number people like to repeat. that full row is the reality and once you actually read it the first thing that matters is not the 0.15 it’s how that 0.15 is built 0.20 men 18–49 0.09 women 18–49 that’s not a subtle imbalance that’s the number. this is not a broad demo performance it’s a concentrated one. when one side of the demo is doing more than double the work of the other side you are not looking at wide audience adoption you are looking at a defined lane showing up consistently and that distinction is everything because certain faux authorities talk about 0.15 like it’s a universal currency when it’s not. a 0.15 built on something like 0.14 women and 0.16 men is a fundamentally different asset than a 0.15 built on 0.09 women and 0.20 men. one is balanced one is narrow. one has flexibility across advertisers scheduling and audience expansion the other is predictable reliable and capped this one is clearly the latter same story in 25–54 0.30 men 25–54 0.13 women 25–54 again more than double same structural dependence same ceiling implication and then you go younger and nothing changes 0.12 adults 18–34 0.10 persons 12–34 0.12 males 12–34 0.07 females 12–34 it’s the same shape repeated across demos which tells you this is not a one week anomaly it’s the product identity. stable consistent defined not expanding and that’s where the difference between narrow reliability and broad strategic heat actually shows up in the data this is reliable. the audience shows up. the profile is predictable. the show holds its lane it is not broad. it is not expanding. it is not signaling that new segments are coming into the tent and changing the ceiling of the property that’s not opinion that’s what the row says now zoom out to the actual cable landscape that night because this is where context starts to cut through the noise Hannity 0.50 NBA on ESPN 0.36 Jesse Watters Primetime 0.28 Gutfeld 0.25 The Source with Kaitlan Collins 0.18 AEW Dynamite 0.15 that’s the board. that’s the tiering. AEW is not competing with the leaders it’s sitting clearly below them in the next band the gap from 0.15 to 0.18 is real the gap from 0.15 to 0.25 is large the gap from 0.15 to 0.36 and 0.50 is massive and this is where people get sloppy because they use ranking to imply proximity when there isn’t any the placements are: 6th in adults 18–49 12th in total viewers those are good placements for a cable property they are not dominant placements and they are not close to dominant placements. 12th at 730k tells you exactly how much total audience is actually there across the full market not just the demo slice people like to highlight and that matters because scale still matters. total audience still matters. you don’t get to ignore it just because the demo is easier to weaponize quickly on the presidential address because this keeps getting dragged in like it explains something and it doesn’t a brief presidential address is not real competition it’s not counterprogramming it’s not sustained audience capture it’s a short interruption that hits every network at the same time. everyone gets disrupted nobody gets singled out. it doesn’t change relative positioning it doesn’t create winners or losers it’s just noise in the system and leaning on it is basically avoiding what the table actually shows same thing with hourly ranks 3rd in an hour 4th in an hour fine but relative to what. if the field is thin outside a few programs you can place well in a window and still be materially behind the actual leaders. a 0.15 does not become a 0.25 because it ranked 3rd it stays a 0.15 now zoom out even further and look at the broader tv ecosystem broadcast that same night is pulling 4M 5M viewers with broader demo balance. different ecosystem yes but it gives you scale perspective. cable is fragmented expectations are different a 0.15 can be a good cable number but that does not make it a market moving television number it makes it solid within its lane and that’s where most of the conversation should stop but it doesn’t because once you layer in actual market structure the ratings matter even less than people think they do the buyer universe is not theoretical it is already allocated high tier buyers netflix amazon apple all operate at 600k+ per telecast levels but only for global scalable franchise inventory netflix has already consolidated the global wwe backbone across raw international distribution and library. there is no incentive to layer overlapping wrestling inventory into that system amazon is deploying capital into nfl nba nascar and large scale league ecosystems. servicing ppv distribution is not the same thing as underwriting long term weekly rights. there is no mandate for niche weekly wrestling at scale apple is curating a premium global sports portfolio aligned with brand identity. nothing niche nothing polarizing nothing demo fragmented clears that filter mid tier buyers disney espn already has wwe premium live events and massive nfl nba and college football commitments. the wrestling lane is already defined at the tentpole level fox is concentrated on nfl and big ten with disciplined incremental spend and no mandate for a second wrestling property peacock is structurally tied into wwe across events and library footprint. that lane is occupied paramount plus max post merger is sitting on one of the heaviest combat sports portfolios in the market ufc at roughly 1.1b per year zuffa boxing pbr nfl afc that is category consolidation not exploration. any additional combat adjacent inventory has to clear duplication against that stack turner inside that same structure is no longer operating independently. it is part of a combined portfolio that already has a defined combat sports identity low tier buyers roku tubi vice are operating in the 150k–300k per telecast range and are not positioned to escalate into premium rights competition so when you actually map the landscape it’s not that buyers are hesitant it’s that lanes are already filled there is no real second bidder dynamic and once you remove the idea of competitive bidding the ratings stop functioning as leverage they become a utility metric now go back to the numbers 0.15 730k male heavy composition those are not bad numbers they are just not strong enough to override strategic redundancy inside a portfolio that already includes ufc and global wwe alignment across multiple platforms so the conversation shifts this is no longer what will the market pay this becomes what is this worth inside our existing portfolio can we fill two hours cheaper can we replicate the demo with studio shows shoulder programming unscripted if yes there is no leverage if no it stays but on controlled terms that’s the real decision tree and this is where the difference between narrow reliability and broad strategic heat becomes the entire story this is reliable inventory. it shows up every week it delivers a consistent demo it fills two hours it holds a lane it is not broad strategic heat. it does not expand the audience map it does not unlock new advertiser categories it does not create urgency across buyers it does not force capital to move and that’s not a criticism it’s a classification so the clean read is simple the number is real the audience is still there the composition is still narrow the placement is still upper middle and none of that on its own creates leverage in a market that is already structurally allocated this is a property negotiating inside someone else’s portfolio not across an open market and that leads to the only conclusion that actually matters once capital is already deployed across nfl nba ufc and global wwe distribution and once the high tier buyers are structurally filtered out this stops being a rights negotiation driven by ratings and becomes an internal portfolio decision driven by overlap cost efficiency and replacement value. at that point a steady 0.15 does not create leverage it defines the floor of what that two hour block is worth relative to everything else competing for the same capital and now add the part everyone either ignores or pretends doesn’t exist TKO is effectively sitting on ~100% of premium combat sports market share at scale when you look at UFC plus WWE across global distribution lanes. that’s not just another player in the category that is the category so when you’re talking about where AEW fits you’re not comparing it in a vacuum you’re comparing it against the most consolidated combat sports stack the business has ever seen and that stack isn’t just operating independently Ari Emanuel has been advising David Ellison for 15+ years that relationship matters because it shapes how these portfolios are thought about at the highest level. this isn’t random alignment this is long term strategic overlap between the people actually making decisions about where billions in rights fees go so when you layer that on top of a potential Paramount controlled WBD structure you’re not just dealing with ratings anymore you’re dealing with a fully informed portfolio strategy that already knows exactly what it values in combat sports and what it doesn’t and then you zoom all the way out to cultural positioning because this part matters more than people think Pat McAfee is in the main event at WrestleMania that’s not a throwaway detail that’s the signal that’s WWE extending into mainstream sports media personalities who already command massive audiences across multiple platforms and pulling them into the biggest event in the space that’s what broad strategic heat actually looks like not just a consistent demo number not just reliable weekly inventory but expansion into new audience layers new distribution touchpoints and new cultural relevance that travels outside the core base so when you put all of this together the picture gets even clearer AEW is stable AEW is reliable AEW fills a lane but it’s operating in a market where the category leader already controls the majority of premium combat IP the decision makers are aligned at the highest levels the buyer universe is structurally closed and the biggest player is actively expanding its cultural footprint beyond wrestling itself that’s the environment so yes a 0.15 matters. yes 730k matters the number isn’t fake the number isn’t terrible the number is specific it tells you exactly what the show is right now it tells you the core audience showed up it tells you that audience is heavily male it tells you women are materially underrepresented it tells you the show converts to about 730k it tells you where it sits on the night it tells you the audience shape hasn’t changed what it doesn’t tell you matters just as much it doesn’t tell you the audience is expanding it doesn’t tell you the show is broadening it doesn’t tell you the ceiling moved this was a good night for a show with a defined audience but none of it overrides the reality that this is being evaluated inside a system that already knows what “must have” looks like and right now that bar is being set somewhere else entirely cc: Dave Meltzer

Nick LoPiccolo

17,146 次观看 • 4 个月前

Why Exchanges Banned This Bot: The 142,000% Return Liquidation Strategy Revealed i finally posted the strategy that got me banned and now the exchanges are probably sweating because i am handing you the keys to the liquidation engine. most people think trading is about charts but the real alpha is hidden in the moments when other traders lose everything. if you can understand why market makers hunt these positions you will never look at a candlestick the same way again. it took years of losing money to liquidations and over trading to realize that hand trading is a losing game for almost everyone on the planet. code is the great equalizer because it removes the emotion that usually causes you to hold a losing position until your account hits zero. i spent hundreds of thousands on developers in the past thinking i could not code myself until i realized i just needed to iterate to success. trading by hand is just driving a horse while everyone else is in a ferrari and the fees alone will chop you up before you even realize you were wrong. i watched a guy with a six million dollar short position sitting just two percent away from total liquidation while i was building this. seeing those numbers on the screen gives me ideas that i can automate into a bot so i dont have to spend my life staring at a monitor. the process i follow is called the rbi system which stands for research backtest and implement. most traders skip the first two steps and go straight to implementation which is why they get smoked on their very first bot. research starts with a backlog of ideas from books or papers or even just watching how the market reacts to big moves. once you have that idea you have to see if it worked in the past using a backtest because if it did not work then it certainly won't work in the future. i have been collecting liquidation data for eighteen months because that data is the lifeblood of a winning system. there is a hidden loop in the market where market makers try to liquidate as many people as possible to find liquidity. i wanted to build a strategy that either trades with that momentum or bets on the bounce right after the liquidation happens. the first strategy i tested was a pure liquidation momentum play that looks for a threshold of nine hundred seventy five thousand dollars in liquidations. when longs get liquidated it shorts the market to continue the down move and it tries to take a one percent profit. this strategy showed a return of over four hundred percent in the backtest while the buy and hold was only thirty three percent. it sounds amazing but you have to be careful with optimized results because you can search with math until you find anything. i decided to flip the logic on its head and create an inverse liquidation strategy that acts as a contrarian. instead of following the move it waits for the longs to get liquidated and then buys the dip after a small price spread. this is where i stumbled onto something that felt like a mistake but turned out to be pure alpha. i accidentally typed in a threshold of three hundred thousand dollars instead of three million and the results were unbelievable. the backtest return jumped to over one hundred forty thousand percent because the bot was catching every single micro bounce in the market. even when i doubled the commission fees to account for the high trade volume the strategy still stayed incredibly profitable. most people would have missed this because they are too busy trying to be right instead of just looking at what the data says. i use tools like claude and cursor to build these bots in minutes when it used to take me an entire week to write the code. if you are not using ai to automate your ideas you are essentially choosing to work ten times harder for less money. i built three separate bots during this session including a momentum bot and two different versions of the inverse spread bot. running these together creates a sort of statistical arbitrage where you can hedge your positions across different market conditions. one bot wins when the market cascades and the other wins when it fakes out and reverses. you have to start with tiny ten dollar sizes because a backtest is never a hundred percent guarantee of what will happen today. i always run my p and l close logic first to make sure the bot exits the position if the stop loss or take profit is hit. it is vital to check your position every fifteen seconds and make sure you are not double ordering or getting stuck in a trade. the goal is to have fully automated systems trading for you so you can actually live your life while the bots do the work. i push all of this code to my private github because i believe that wall street will never show you how this actually works. you have to be a doer and not a dabbler if you want to actually make it in this industry. the reason i show everything live on youtube is to prove that anyone can learn to do this if they are willing to iterate. you dont need to be a math genius you just need to follow the rbi system and stay disciplined with your risk. every liquidation you see on the chart is a signal and if you know how to read them you are no longer the one being hunted. i am currently running the third version of the bot to see how it handles the live market volatility. it is a beautiful thing to see a system enter and exit a trade perfectly without you having to click a single button. the fees are the silent killer of hand traders but a bot can be programmed to use limit orders and stay efficient. if you learn to code you can build anything for the rest of your life regardless of where you are in the world. stop trying to guess which way the candle will go and start building systems that can handle both directions. i am going to keep testing these three strategies against each other to find the ultimate ensemble for this current market. once you find a winning edge you just have to scale it up slowly and keep refining the parameters. the exchanges might not like that i am sharing this but code is the great equalizer and it is time for you to use it. i will be back tomorrow to show the results and keep building more systems until everything is fully automated
1:23:35

Why Exchanges Banned This Bot: The 142,000% Return Liquidation Strategy Revealed i finally posted the strategy that got me banned and now the exchanges are probably sweating because i am handing you the keys to the liquidation engine. most people think trading is about charts but the real alpha is hidden in the moments when other traders lose everything. if you can understand why market makers hunt these positions you will never look at a candlestick the same way again. it took years of losing money to liquidations and over trading to realize that hand trading is a losing game for almost everyone on the planet. code is the great equalizer because it removes the emotion that usually causes you to hold a losing position until your account hits zero. i spent hundreds of thousands on developers in the past thinking i could not code myself until i realized i just needed to iterate to success. trading by hand is just driving a horse while everyone else is in a ferrari and the fees alone will chop you up before you even realize you were wrong. i watched a guy with a six million dollar short position sitting just two percent away from total liquidation while i was building this. seeing those numbers on the screen gives me ideas that i can automate into a bot so i dont have to spend my life staring at a monitor. the process i follow is called the rbi system which stands for research backtest and implement. most traders skip the first two steps and go straight to implementation which is why they get smoked on their very first bot. research starts with a backlog of ideas from books or papers or even just watching how the market reacts to big moves. once you have that idea you have to see if it worked in the past using a backtest because if it did not work then it certainly won't work in the future. i have been collecting liquidation data for eighteen months because that data is the lifeblood of a winning system. there is a hidden loop in the market where market makers try to liquidate as many people as possible to find liquidity. i wanted to build a strategy that either trades with that momentum or bets on the bounce right after the liquidation happens. the first strategy i tested was a pure liquidation momentum play that looks for a threshold of nine hundred seventy five thousand dollars in liquidations. when longs get liquidated it shorts the market to continue the down move and it tries to take a one percent profit. this strategy showed a return of over four hundred percent in the backtest while the buy and hold was only thirty three percent. it sounds amazing but you have to be careful with optimized results because you can search with math until you find anything. i decided to flip the logic on its head and create an inverse liquidation strategy that acts as a contrarian. instead of following the move it waits for the longs to get liquidated and then buys the dip after a small price spread. this is where i stumbled onto something that felt like a mistake but turned out to be pure alpha. i accidentally typed in a threshold of three hundred thousand dollars instead of three million and the results were unbelievable. the backtest return jumped to over one hundred forty thousand percent because the bot was catching every single micro bounce in the market. even when i doubled the commission fees to account for the high trade volume the strategy still stayed incredibly profitable. most people would have missed this because they are too busy trying to be right instead of just looking at what the data says. i use tools like claude and cursor to build these bots in minutes when it used to take me an entire week to write the code. if you are not using ai to automate your ideas you are essentially choosing to work ten times harder for less money. i built three separate bots during this session including a momentum bot and two different versions of the inverse spread bot. running these together creates a sort of statistical arbitrage where you can hedge your positions across different market conditions. one bot wins when the market cascades and the other wins when it fakes out and reverses. you have to start with tiny ten dollar sizes because a backtest is never a hundred percent guarantee of what will happen today. i always run my p and l close logic first to make sure the bot exits the position if the stop loss or take profit is hit. it is vital to check your position every fifteen seconds and make sure you are not double ordering or getting stuck in a trade. the goal is to have fully automated systems trading for you so you can actually live your life while the bots do the work. i push all of this code to my private github because i believe that wall street will never show you how this actually works. you have to be a doer and not a dabbler if you want to actually make it in this industry. the reason i show everything live on youtube is to prove that anyone can learn to do this if they are willing to iterate. you dont need to be a math genius you just need to follow the rbi system and stay disciplined with your risk. every liquidation you see on the chart is a signal and if you know how to read them you are no longer the one being hunted. i am currently running the third version of the bot to see how it handles the live market volatility. it is a beautiful thing to see a system enter and exit a trade perfectly without you having to click a single button. the fees are the silent killer of hand traders but a bot can be programmed to use limit orders and stay efficient. if you learn to code you can build anything for the rest of your life regardless of where you are in the world. stop trying to guess which way the candle will go and start building systems that can handle both directions. i am going to keep testing these three strategies against each other to find the ultimate ensemble for this current market. once you find a winning edge you just have to scale it up slowly and keep refining the parameters. the exchanges might not like that i am sharing this but code is the great equalizer and it is time for you to use it. i will be back tomorrow to show the results and keep building more systems until everything is fully automated

Moon Dev

11,948 次观看 • 5 个月前

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.
13:04

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.

Arjun Mahadevan (Mr. LLC 🇺🇸)

37,744 次观看 • 5 个月前