Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🫦 rhythm goon challenge 🫦 🫦 rhythm goon challenge 🫦 🫦 rhythm goon challenge 🫦 sync it to the beat😈💦 ❤️‍🔥&🔁 if you're trying right now 🎁Throne gift = big support + previews (dm me)⬇️ In-game gifts are welcum💝 #FortniteNSFW #FortniteR34 #Fortslut #FortniteAss #Gooner

23,874 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

.Chrys Bader and I talk about longevity. Join the conversation: “If we extend lifespan, the greatest challenge is going to be boredom because the pattern seems to be that when you're young, you're amused by very short-term games. You're amused by playing soap bubbles or Legos that are right in front of you and have no longer-term meaning. And then you go into video games and board games that might last you for days or weeks. And then you go into playing social games that might last you for months or even years. And you go into college and work and you play building company and career games and you play mating games that might last you a decade. And then you have children. You play the children game and that might last you several decades. And then you play the meditation and spirituality game and that might last you for many, many decades until you die. But if you have a lifespan measured in the hundreds and thousands of years, you're going to have to play really long-term games to hold your interest. And I'm not even sure what those games look like. Obviously, they're open-ended. Obviously, they're infinite and non-existent. But if you have a lifespan measured in the hundreds and thousands of years, but almost any game becomes boring. So the challenge for any creature sufficiently long-lived is what game to play that I haven't yet seen through and that will last me till the end of days.” “Every time people talk about longevity, I think about this. Not as well articulated as you just laid everything out, but I think that sums it about right. Eventually I'm like, well, what am I gonna do? You know, you're aging. You will age out of trends. You will age out of your friends. They might pass away if you're living longer than everybody. So, I think longevity is just a path to loneliness in the end. So rather than trying to live longer, why not try to live more and put more in the years that you have? After my daughter was born recently, it was the first time I felt like I actually did want to live longer because I wanted to see her grow. And I want to see her grow into a mature adult, and I don't want to leave the world too early to see that. But that's really the only thing that's got me motivated to stay alive longer now.” “I wouldn't want you to take what I said as an argument against longevity. Longevity and health span are good goals, and everybody wants to live longer and healthier. It's always going to be your choice of how you want to spend that time. And yeah, eventually you may end up just a Buddhist monk meditating, or you may end up loving and enjoying every moment, or you might just take on longer and longer term goals. I just think the nature of the game that you're playing will change towards much more infinite games than finite games, to use James Carse’s terminology. And it should just be your choice. So I'm very, very pro-longevity. I'm just pointing out that there are these looping games that we play in life, and as you live longer and longer, the nature of these games are going to change, and you're going to get tired of certain games, until perhaps you see through the game entirely. But even then, I'll take the choice of health and lifespan over old age and death.”

Naval

195,477 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Sneako calls out Asmongold and roasts xQc, Zherka, Fuentes Also shows appreciation for Destiny helping him get better at debates through practice "Asmongold, it looks really bad when u say u don't do research and u just make it up as u go..it looks really stupid when u say ur gonna be a Christian crusader and ur an atheist..it looks really stupid when u say ur too coward to go and debate, but ur begging for more war that u don't even understand..it looks really bad when u always talk about the roaches running around ur room..it looks really bad when u say u don't shower for 2 weeks straight..when u talk about furthering the white race but ur there with an Asian of girl" "Look at the frame right now..it goes me then Asmongold reacting to me, then Asmongold reacting, then Destiny reacting, and then xQc reacting, and then me reacting" "I gotta be honest..Destiny, completely disagree with him on a lot of things..he's a Zionist speaking to IDF soldiers saying..if ur gonna commit crimes and put on a dress, just turn the cameras off..but when I first started streaming in 2022, I had countless debates with Destiny..he probably won 8 out of 10 debates..that was good training" “They (xQc) don’t care about getting the truth..he’s saying debates are all about optics..he just wants to monetize his g*y kaff*r audience” "I'm not here trying to beat Asmongold, I want him to think about all the dumb stuff he says all the time..not trying to do a gotcha, just trying to get him to challenge his own belief system cause he has a very big audience..Laura Loomer, Asmongold, and Pablo Fuentes sound identical..oh Sneako is gonna commit a terr*rist attack"

yeet

54,242 görüntüleme • 29 gün önce

Wolverine's difficulty does not stem from a complex combat system, but rather from the placement, variety, and quantity of the enemies that you will face. One of the more difficult combat trials that I experienced had you facing a group of enemies comprised of a large dude, multiple basic enemies, two energy shield enemies, and a few more guys. Because this was a challenge map, the goal was to take out the big guy first, and there was a timer that I had to beat. Facing these guys head on was essentially guaranteed failure, cuz they would either overwhelm me immediately, or by the time I killed them all the timer would run out. You had to sneak around them and avoid the mutant detection alarms to sneak attack the large berserker and remove half his health, and then immediately begin open combat. Now think of this like Batman Arkham, where shield enemies require a special combo to beat, knife enemies can't be countered, and large guys have to be stunned with your cape before being attacked... Same concept here, but much more focused on dodging at the right time, parrying at the right time, and using your special attacks at the right moments. The shield guys HAD to be kicked before slashing him, the gun holders HAD to be dodged to avoid damage, and the sword guys HAD to be parried, all while the large dude is on your ass doing area effect attacks that can 2-3 hit you. These are all from the Trask soldiers faction btw, and there's of course "The Hand" faction of enemies, and more that they haven't revealed yet. This is obviously just ONE example, and I'm not even trying to say it's the most revolutionary combat system ever, because even I still need to try more of the combat to be fully sold on it, but I just wanted to give a better image to y'all of what combat will feel like once you're no longer in the tutorial stage of the game. I also didn't LOVE the sentinel boss fight, but it's hard to give proper criticism to this game right now without seeming like an absolute chud thanks to the current discourse lmao

Farzam 🔜 Gamescom

170,369 görüntüleme • 9 gün önce

Recently I got some hands-on time with Crimson Desert and below are my first impressions as well as some of the gameplay I was able to capture. Crimson Desert is a good game, but it won’t be for everyone. I know the devs claim this isn’t an RPG, but I don’t know any other way to describe this game other than a HARDCORE action RPG. If you need the yellow paint to know where to climb this game isn’t for you. But if you love getting lost in a whimsical world with a boat load of content this game is going to be right up your alley. I think what impressed me most is the attention to detail. There’s so many little things the dev team took into consideration that I think people who enjoy being immersed into a world are going to appreciate. Even if you aren’t that person; on a basic level I think most will enjoy the game's combat. It’s fast, fluid and provides a ton of player expression with its deep skill tree. The world of Pywel is vibrant, large in scale and full of life. It’s easy to get lost off the main quest line as there’s always something to do and someone to speak to. An example being I was wandering through the open world and encountered a distressed woman seeking help. I agreed to follow her only to find out moments later she was with a gang and they were trying to back door me. That had me cracking up. I think if the open world is consistently full of fun, unique side content like that & the main quest line is fire this game has a lot of potential to impress. It’s just a shame that I didn’t get to spend more time with the main quests as I kept getting side tracked with cool stuff to do in the open world. So I can’t give you much insight into that. What I can say is after the opening section there’s NEXT TO NO tutorials in this game, the puzzles are hard & the default controls are a bit clunky. You will be getting lost and I can see that frustrating some people who aren’t interested in a challenge. That’s why I mentioned earlier that this is a hardcore RPG. It does not do a lot of hand holding. Because of that I predict you and your friends will be sharing tips and tricks similar to when Elden Ring first launched and nobody knew what they were doing. If you are a patient person and take the time to learn the game's systems I promise you will be able to put together some awesome combos that will make you feel like the main character. My biggest fear for this game is that I won't finish it. Not because it’s a bad game, but I can just tell from my brief time with it that it’s next level massive. As someone who's been gaming for 30+ years it’s very rare you’ll hear me say a game was overwhelming, but this game is. For people who lack a ton of free time I can see that being a turn off because once again the game doesn’t give much direction or tutorials outside the opening area. Not to mention this game could be big just for the sake of being big. I was curious to know how much of the content was engaging versus just open world bloat? Hard to tell because I only got a few hours with the game. I also fear that the Ai isn’t the best in this game. The Ai issues I encountered zapped all immersion away for those moments. I’m not sure if the final build will differ from the vertical slice we played, but what I can tell you is that on the build we played I wasn’t impressed by the Ai. Several times I attacked enemy camps and they never reacted to me attacking them. They just stood there and took it which made the world feel less alive. There were also times where enemies were looking dead at me just standing still as the battle music played threatening to beat me up, but they never did anything. It was 3 or 4 times I encountered this poor Ai which is a red flag for me because I only got two hours of hands on time with the game. Mind you in those two hours a good portion of it was just me working my way through the prologue and the early quests, so I didn't spend a ton of time in the open world. What I'm trying to get at is the janky ai was very noticeable. It wasn't something that took long to find. I will say when the game works it's great, but when I tell you the Ai was bad at times it was bad. It reminded me of the dumb NPC’s often found in Ubisoft open world games. I’m not looking for this to be a Souls game but I want some level of challenge in the combat. Hopefully that stuff gets patched out. That being said, I’m confident in saying this game is good. I just didn’t have enough time with it to determine if it’s good, or GREAT. Only time will tell when Crimson Desert drops on March 19th, 2026 for the PC, PS5 and Xbox Series. Pros —---------- - Combat makes you feel like demon - Deep Skill tree - Vibrant world - Solid voice acting - Fire OST - The little details (trust system, you can commit crimes ect.) - No Fall damage - Puzzles are creative & challenging - Game doesn’t hold you hand (some people will hate this) - You can swap in and out of 3rd and 1st person at will. Wasn’t able to explore much of how that changes the game, but it’s nice that it's an option. - EASILY over 100hrs of content (some will hate this though) Cons —---------- - Clunky controls (Default controls take some time adjusting too. I hope there’s other control schemes at launch) - Inconsistent Ai (Ubisoft bad at times. sometimes the enemies wouldn’t attack during combat or act like they never saw you) - Long load times (we were playing on PC’s, but idk the specs) - Your horse can faint & when they do traveling the large world wasn’t as fun (and I couldn’t figure out how to get him back - most likely a skill issue) - Early stamina management is OD. Early game it’s easy to drown & get tired running. I’d imagine it gets better late game, but early game it’s frustrating trying to explore. - Camera takes some getting used to in combat. Sometimes its too close and others too far. - Early arrows have no impact. Felt useless. Hoping later upgrades fix that

The Black Hokage

1,175,183 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Bill Maher: “Why Can’t We Even Call It Islamic Terrorism?” Bill Maher: Obama said, “No religion is responsible for terrorism. People are responsible for violence and terrorism.” That sounds a lot like the NRA slogan. Rob Reiner: Yeah. “Guns don't kill people, people kill...” Bill Maher: He also said, “The notion that the West is at war with Islam is an ugly lie.” The Atlantic said, “The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic.” So, who's right about this? Rob Reiner: I think neither are right. If you look at the most violent Islamic groups, whether it's ISIS or Al-Qaeda, these are essentially Sunni-based. And they would not be where they are now, especially in Syria and Iraq, had we not removed Saddam Hussein. Bill Maher: He looks better all the time. Rob Reiner: I'm not saying Saddam Hussein was a good guy. Bill Maher: He wasn't a good guy, but sometimes there are no good answers. It's just the best one possible. Rob Reiner: Basically, it is a religious war, but it's a religious sectarian war. And to paint it all as “Islamic,” I think is a big mistake. Elahe Izadi: Obama is trying to avoid the phrase “Islamic extremism.” This was the same challenge President Bush confronted. Bill Nye: If you say everybody who's Islamic is a terrorist, you're headed for trouble. Bill Maher: No one is saying that. Bill Maher: But this idea that we cannot even call it “Islamic terrorism” seems Orwellian to me. We're paying a very high price for this, which is we can't discuss it even rationally. Can't we at least say that there are a number of factors involved, and the religion is certainly one of them? Rob Reiner: Absolutely. Bill Maher: He presented this idea that it's poverty and education. It is poverty and education also, but why are they impoverished and uneducated? It's mostly because of the religion. Bill Nye: What do you think about pumping the internet into there, somehow? So that everybody had access to all of these books... Bill Maher: Yeah, that's another thing the religion might be against. And not to mention the sex part. They're fucked up about women!

Jeff

180,664 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

‼️🚨🔵 PRESSER 🔵🚨‼️ 🎙 Liam Rosenior’s Full Pre-Arsenal Press Conference 🌀 Liam Rosenior on squad rotation & not having a “best XI” ⚙️ “I can’t speak for other managers in terms of myself. I don’t have a best XI. I never have done in all of the clubs that I’ve worked with. Why? Because of the demands — the physical demands of the Premier League, Ligue 1 or the Championship now with 46 games. You need a squad, and you need to use the players in the correct way to challenge over the course of the season. I’ve been here three and a half weeks, I’m still getting to know the players. I try to pick the right starting team, but I also try to pick a bench that gives us the right finishing team. So far, the substitutes in every game have made a huge impact. That’s not just tactical — a big part of that is mentality.” 🧠💪 🌀 Liam Rosenior on Estevão ❤️ “He is going through a really difficult time for personal reasons. I won’t put any pressure on him when he returns. It has to be right for him.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on facing Arsenal ⚔️ “The reality is Arsenal are favourites. They’re a goal up and they’re at home, so they’ll expect to go through. We need to take it as far and as deep as we can, then hopefully the second half of the tie will be massive in terms of turning it around.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on Jamie Gittens’ injury 🚑 “Jamie unfortunately felt his hamstring. I don’t yet know the extent of the injury. It’s a real shame because I wanted to give him a start and allow him to show what he can do. Hopefully it’s not too bad.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on Chelsea’s mentality in big games 🔥 “They can play in big games and they can perform in big games — and it is definitely a big game on Tuesday.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on focus & preparation 🧊 “Talking about what Arsenal or Mikel Arteta have or haven’t done isn’t my concern. My concern is resting and recovering. It’s another three-game week. It’s going to be a very physical game on Tuesday, and my job is to prepare the team as best I can.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on Arsenal’s recent nerves 😌 “We’ll see. We’ll see. We’ll go and play our game.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on experience within his squad 🏆 “When I look at my players — Enzo Fernandez has won a World Cup, and the group won two trophies last year. They can play in big games, they can perform in big games. Tuesday is definitely a big game.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on Enzo Fernández 🧠⚡ “He’s fit. You see him arriving in the box in the 92nd, 93rd minute. Enzo has a rare athleticism — a gift — where he recovers very quickly. His distances covered are top from a data point of view, and the quality and leadership he brings to the team is huge. I’m really enjoying working with him.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on Mamadou Sarr 🤝 “I don’t speak about players who are at other clubs. It’s something I’ve never done, and I won’t start today.” 🌀 Liam Rosenior on pressure & proving himself 🎯 “I’ll be really honest — all this talk about proof of whether I’m right for the job or not, I don’t really care. I’m here to do the job. If we get to the final, it’s great for Chelsea Football Club. It’s not about me. I’ll prove in time whether I’m worthy or not, but it’s not at the forefront of my mind.”

Miki Djan

72,283 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Every night as a kid, Kobe Bryant fell asleep visualizing basketball. He’d see himself scoring 10 straight. Then 20. Then 30. “But in the dream, why would you ever interrupt that?” “So you keep dreaming.” “Before I go to sleep, I’m at 120 points.” In 2006, he scored 81. Kobe spent an hour at USC explaining what Mamba Mentality really means: He was born to play. "I started playing at like 2 years old." "My father wasn't one of these fathers that was like: you're going to play basketball. It was just I was around the game a lot and I gravitated to the ball." "I was completely geeking out about the smell of the ball. The way it sounds when it hits concrete versus how it hits a parquet floor." "The sound of the nets. The different material of the nets." "There's certain basketball hoops where the rim sits slightly above the backboard. I was geeking out if I got into a gym where they were completely parallel." "Little shit like that would freak me out." "To answer your question, I was born to do this thing, man. And I did it non-stop all day long from the age of 2 to when I retired." He explains how to know if you've found your thing. "That's the trick, isn't it? Finding what you love to do." "We talk about hard work all the time. And it's like, if you got to get up every single morning and remind yourself how hard you need to work, you probably need to choose a different profession." "That shouldn't be there." "I wake up in the morning excited to get to it. If I'm not training, I'm missing it. If I'm not watching a game of basketball, I miss it." "There's no place I'd rather be." "If you have that feeling, then you're truly doing what God has put you on this earth to do." He explains the 81-point game. "When you grow up downloading that into your brain over and over and over..." "That summer, I made 1000 shots a day. 1000. On top of weight training and conditioning." "And they weren't just shots. They were shots that you saw in that game." "Coming out of the corner. Going to the pinch post. Footwork in the post. Coming off the screen." "It was very specific." "So when you download that into your system and you go out on the court, you're just executing things that you've done thousands of times before." "And you have that dream." "Then that becomes possible." He explains why he doesn't reinvent. "Everything's been not choreographed, but it's been practiced so many times that it's second nature." "Why reinvent it?" "I don't understand that. You go out and play the game and you're just trying to create something new. No." "This is what I do. This is what I do extremely well." "You're going to have to stop me from doing that. And if you do stop me from doing that, I have a counter to that." "Done." He explains the pain. "To be honest, I wasn't even thinking about the game." "My knee was hurting so much. I didn't know then, but I had a flap of cartilage stuck in my joint line." "My mind was really trying to go to a place where I don't feel that pain." "The game started. And because of that, I was just in a different space." "I wasn't worried about what was to come. I wasn't worried about what just happened. I was just here." "When you're just there in the moment, your focus is heightened because nothing else matters." Pete Carroll asked the hard question. "What was it like for you to play with people that weren't as gritty as you were?" Kobe's response. "I'd kill them. I'd bury them." "The kind of culture that the Laker organization stood for, winning championships, is not tolerated." "You're going to show up to play. And you're going to lollygag through this scrimmage, through this drill? I'm going to beat you." "I'm going to let you know I beat you." "I'm going to want you to reconsider your professional life choice." "People will say: okay, that doesn't make a great teammate." "Well, I'm not here to be a great teammate. I'm here to help you win championships." "So it's different." He explains practice. "As a leader of a team, it's your responsibility to elevate the rest of the guys." "What people tend to get stuck on is saying: the way to make players better is to pass them the ball when they're open." "That's a very trivial way to look at things." "You have to get them emotionally to want to be better. You have to get them to an emotional space where they wake up every morning driven to be the best version of themselves." "How do you do that?" "In practice for me, it was a chance to drive them, to challenge them." "You have to know your teammates. Because then you know what nerve to touch." "Some guys, it's like: okay, come on, we can do this. That'll get them going." "Other guys, no. You got to figure out what button to push." He gives an example. "Pau was always Spain." "If I tell him how they lost in the gold medal to us and how they're going to lose again, how I'm going to beat your ass in practice just like I beat you in the gold medal game." "Oh. He would hate that. He would hate that." "But that's what practice was. You have to drive them." "If practice is more intense and harder than a game seven will be, then a game seven will be easy." "But if it's not, then that's when teams start folding and capitulating." He explains standards. "If I got to fight to get you in the gym, that's a problem. That's a problem." "You want players that are gym rats. Players that want to be in the gym, that want to work." "Then from there, you build on top of that." "But if you're lazy, man, I don't want to talk to you. I don't want to deal with you. You make me feel dumber." "You're going to lower my level. I don't think so." "You can go over there. There's plenty of teams where you'll fit right in." He explains loyalty. The Lakers offered to trade him to a contending team. His response. "We've known each other for a very long time. I'm questioning myself because I'm wondering what about me makes you think I would jump ship." "We don't do that." "As a leader, you got to be able to take the good with the bad." "You can't just because the ship's sinking all of a sudden jump off and swim to another. You don't do that." "If you can win championships in front of everybody, then you could miss the playoffs in front of everybody." "You got to be able to take both sides of it." "If you're doing something that's easy, you might want to reconsider what you're doing." He explains what he wishes he knew earlier. "Understanding empathy and compassion." "As a young kid when I came in the league, it was like: I'm driving this way and either you're going to be on the train or be on the track." "There was no such thing as understanding that people have lives outside of the game. Which apparently I did not." "If I understood that at an early age, then it helps me as a leader to communicate better." "Getting to know people on a personal level. What are their fears. What are their insecurities. What are their dreams and ambitions." "When you come to understand that about a person, then you can help them reach the best version of themselves." "I wish I'd known that earlier." He explains how he teaches his daughter. "My daughter said: Dad, can you teach me how to play basketball? I want to be better than you." "All right, cool. Let's start with 15 minutes a day." "For 15 minutes a day, we just stood right in front of the hoop and just shot. Right under the hoop. We didn't move around. We didn't do any dribbling." "Just 15 minutes a day just shoot here." "You do that for a month and a half. Then next month, you step back. Then next month, you step back again. Then you start working on dribbling." "Through actionable things is how we teach our children." "If it becomes a part of their process in sports, it'll become a part of their process in life as well." He explains dreams. "I just dream. I have dreams." "Dreams should be pure." "A lot of times when we're born into this world, we actually wind up going backwards." "The more we mature, the more responsible our dreams become. The more governors we put on ourselves and our ability to dream and to reimagine." "It's always a fight for us to make sure that our dreams always stay pure." "It's not a matter of pushing beyond your limitations or expectations." "It's really a matter of protecting your dreams. Protecting your imagination." "That's really the key." "When you do that, then the world just seems limitless."

Jaynit

17,383 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Late in the 2016 NCAA Men's Basketball Championship, Villanova blew a 10-point lead. With 4.7 seconds left, UNC hit a 3-pointer to tie the game. Villanova's head coach, Jay Wright, called a timeout, and as his players walked to the huddle, they were all saying the same word: “Attitude.” “It's the most important aspect of our program,” Coach Wright explains in his book titled, Attitude. “We wear 'Attitude' wristbands. And when we break a huddle, we say '1, 2, 3, Attitude.'” The test of Attitude, Wright taught his players, is: “Where is your mindset after something bad happens to you?” Where is your mindset after you blow a 10-point lead? Where is your mindset after your opponent hits a 3 to tie the game with 4.7 seconds left? “When I looked into the eyes of our players,” Wright writes, “I saw no anger or regret. No one bemoaned [the UNC player's] 'lucky shot,' or that any of our guys had failed to stop him from grabbing the pass that led to that shot, or anything else.” Instead, “they were all saying, 'Attitude. Attitude. This is what we do. Attitude. This is what we do.'” With this mindset, the players returned to the court. Villanova's Kris Jenkins inbounded the ball to Ryan "Arch" Arcidiacono. Arch dribbled up the left side of the court, crossed half court, cut right towards the 3-point arc, where he underhanded a pass to Jenkins, who caught the ball with 1.3 seconds left, and, in perfect rhythm, jumped then released the ball with 0.6 seconds, and hit a buzzer-beater to win the 2016 NCAA Men's Basketball Championship. Takeaway 1: A primary indicator of physical fitness is recovery time. If you are doing all-out sprint intervals, for instance—people who are physically fit recover from one interval to the next faster than those who are not physically fit. “So then, what is mental fitness?” the mental performance coach Greg Harden likes to ask. “Mental fitness is about recovery time,” Harden says. It's about, as Coach Wright said, where your mindset is after something bad happens to you. After something bad happens, people who are mentally fit recover faster than those who are not. Takeaway 2: Just after Kris Jenkins hit the buzzer-beater, Coach Wright famously barely reacted. Before his guys went back on the court, he explained, “I processed all the potential scenarios.” Most likely, the game was going to go to overtime where UNC would ride their wave of momentum and win the game. “No matter the outcome,” Wright continued, “because of the way our players responded after UNC tied the game ["Attitude. Attitude. This is what we do."]—I felt like they had the greatest lesson in life. I felt like that was an accomplishment that would follow them through their lives.” Ryan Holiday once told me, “You have to get to a place where doing the work is the win and everything else is extra.” Wright got to that place. He had done the work to instill in his players a mindset, he said, “that they would carry with them for the remainder of their days on earth.” “In that sense, I knew we had already won.” Everything else was extra. - - - “The fact is, none of us control what happens to us in life—but we do control our responses to those circumstances...no matter how tough it gets or how much of a challenge you face in the final 4.7 seconds of a game.” — Jay Wright Follow Billy Oppenheimer for more content like this!

Billy Oppenheimer

1,289,389 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Just in $AMD Anush "Speed is the moat"|ROCm🎙️ In the race to define the future of AI, what's the one advantage that truly lasts? It's not proprietary tech, argues Anush Elangovan Elangovan, VP of AI Software at AMD , but the sustainable speed of innovation. He explains why AMD is rejecting the "walled garden" model for its open source ROCm stack, betting that an open community flywheel is the key to victory. Listen to understand how this open strategy is designed to out-innovate closed systems by empowering developers to solve everything from frontier-model challenges to the mundane, everyday problems that define the "last mile" of AI. AMD ROCm Software: Part 1 Transcript [00:00:00] Andrew Zigler: Joining me is Anush Elangovan, VP of AI software at AMD. And when people talk about AI compute, the conversation often stops at hardware specs, but it's more than just physical chips that win the game. It's also the software ecosystems supporting them. [00:00:18] Andrew Zigler: The prevailing strategy in the industry has been to build something like a walled garden. You know, something closed, proprietary locks, developers in. But AMD is betting on an entirely different play, open source acceleration, and with rock, their open source AI software stack. AMD is building not just hardware parity, but an innovation flywheel that's powered by the community with interoperability and the freedom to scale without all of that pesky lockin. [00:00:48] Andrew Zigler: And in this world, speed is your moat and how fast you can innovate while your platform remains open, flexible, and standardize across all of its applications. That's what we're gonna explore [00:01:00] today. So Anush, I'm really excited to have you here. Welcome to Dev Interrupted. [00:01:04] Anush Elangovan: Thanks for having me. Uh, super excited to chat about it. [00:01:07] Andrew Zigler: Amazing. Well, let's go ahead and dive right in with kind of what I laid it out with in the beginning, the idea of the moat and it being about speed. I wanna unpack that a bit because that came from you when you and I first spoke. And I, and I want to know, you know, how do you define speed inside of AMD beyond just things like hardware, benchmarks. [00:01:27] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So when we typically talk about speed, everyone's like, Hey, hardware benchmark specs, right? Like, uh, memory bandwidth or, or flops. And that is one important part of it, uh, AMD does very well. With that, we do have, a, a very good history of executing on that axis. [00:01:47] Anush Elangovan: But when I say speed is the moat, it is about, uh, how we prepare, how we build the muscle to run the race for a long time and run it fast. And it is [00:02:00] not about a single point in time that you've, you've beat some you know, benchmark and, and you declare victory. It's about building the ability to consistently develop and deliver. [00:02:13] Anush Elangovan: Both hardware and software innovation at scale and do it fast, right? Like, you know, we we're increasingly getting to a point where models come out and they're, uh, you know, a year or two ago it was like, Hey, they work on AMD on day zero, which is great, but now they are performing on AMD the day it releases, right? [00:02:32] Anush Elangovan: So, what does it take to Prefetch where the industry is going? Be prepared to intercept. At that point is what you know, I, I refer to as you know, the, the speed factor in, in creating this mode, right? And the mode is just shed all things that hold you back and run as fast as you can. [00:02:53] Anush Elangovan: Uh, because the pace of innovation that is, uh, being seen in, in AI [00:03:00] industries is just. Amazing. Right? And it's like, it's transformational at at how you generate electricity. It's transformational as at how you build data centers. It's transformational at how you deploy compute, networking. It's transformational at what kind of use cases you, you know, uh, use AI for. [00:03:17] Anush Elangovan: Uh, and for that, you need to be prepared to, see what comes tomorrow and be prepared to run the race tomorrow. [00:03:23] Andrew Zigler: Yeah, it's a really great perspective because it highlights that it's not just like a checkpoint that you run through. I like how you called out, like it's not just hitting that benchmark or being the best in class at that moment, in that snapshot, it's about having a. The throughput and about having that dedication to the idea and continuing to deliver on it. [00:03:43] Andrew Zigler: It's not just crossing the threshold, but it's also being the engine. And that's what, that's what protects a business. That is the moat, because the moat is that innovation layer, the faster and more, uh, future forward. That you can work and think, [00:04:00] you know, the better. Uh, we, we talk a lot about like future forward work styles. [00:04:04] Andrew Zigler: Like what are the things I could be doing right now today that are gonna be like, way more useful tomorrow? Let, let's abandon those, workflows that are older and that kind of like, that translates into. An advantage when you work that way. You know, what kind of things have you learned working with, uh, like across all spectrums of people who would use ROCm, right? [00:04:23] Andrew Zigler: You have like the developers, but then you also have the enterprises and you have this large span of adoptees, right? So what is the, what does that look like that you learn? [00:04:32] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, so, so the way I look at it is there are gonna be pockets of different, uh, you know, cadences, right? Like, so people who are deploying in enterprises, for example, right? The validation and how long it takes for them to deploy an LLM that's secure. It's, with guardrails, et cetera, maybe longer. [00:04:52] Anush Elangovan: but you still have to go through the process and you have to be prepared to like, walk that walk to deploy an enterprises. That doesn't mean it's [00:05:00] not fast, that's as fast as you can do for that industry, right? And if you are deploying AI in healthcare, right, it's, it's got its own, uh, cycle. [00:05:07] Anush Elangovan: but in each one of these, you want to see how, like, go down to the essence of what is it that you actually have to do. And, you know, I, I, I like how you framed it. It's like it's, you shed your prior assumptions of how things are done, right. And, and you kind of build up from a, uh, first principles, uh, approach to say, this is how I could use AI to unlock, whatever I'm doing. [00:05:33] Anush Elangovan: And, and, some of it, you know, it's good to really step back and look at. Just question every part of it, right? Like right now you're getting chat GPT and, Gemini competing for like, math, olympiads and, and, uh, college, uh, reasoning, uh, tests. Right? And, and those are like that, that is amazing and increasingly like complex tasks that they're trying to do. [00:05:58] Anush Elangovan: But there may also be like. [00:06:00] More mundane things that AI could, could get applied to. Right? And, and so when we think about shedding old ways, you wanna shed it not just in like the tip of the spear. It's like, you know, I'm gonna see what's the frontier model. It's also, it could be something as simple as. [00:06:18] Anush Elangovan: How do you choose a, a movie, uh, you know, like a recommendation system, right? Or, or, uh, an automated, uh, flight, uh, rebooking system. So the moment, you know, your flight is late, uh, right now it's a notification, right? It's like, oh, you got a text message saying your flight's late. And I got that like three times this week. [00:06:38] Anush Elangovan: But anyway, uh, and, and, and, and, I was just like, okay, so if I were to rethink this. All this MCPs that we have that should be hooked up into an MCP that says, your flight's delayed. Here are your options. If you want, you know, these are the paid options. Yeah. Here are the free options. This will get you back into your you know, Toronto airport [00:07:00] tonight. [00:07:00] Anush Elangovan: Or if you stay, here's a hotel plus this, plus this, plus. It's just like, go ahead is all I should say. Versus now I'm like, okay, can someone, you know, can I call a travel agent? Can I do this? Can I go online and log into And you know, so we gotta fundamentally rethink even those like small, nuances of, things that we do that can be automated out and AI is really, really good at doing something like this, right? Maybe I just explained an AI startup idea right now. Somebody should just start that. [00:07:29] Andrew Zigler: I think you did. Yeah, you definitely did. Someone, one of our listeners is definitely going to lift that off of you. I, I, I, you know, I hate being on the receiving end of those. You feel a little helpless and then you have to like, follow the whole flow. So I know what you mean. Like I, I like how you called out that the build and this like. [00:07:45] Andrew Zigler: Where speed is your moat and the innovation layer is protecting you, is what makes you better than your competitors. How you scale that and you bring that to market. So by understanding the problems that you're solving, uh, throwing away those older assumptions, but also [00:08:00] recognizing that like. We're building every single day, new things and new ways of using stuff that we're still figuring out the implications of. [00:08:08] Andrew Zigler: And so when you have a lot of velocity and you're introducing a lot of new ideas, and maybe you have that workflow now that automatically rebook your flight off of your late flight text message, and uh, I know I would certainly use it, but you know, what kind of philosophies guide the way that y'all think about building this ecosystem to manage that stability while letting folks. [00:08:29] Andrew Zigler: Play with the speed and the assumptions and the airplane re bookings. [00:08:34] Anush Elangovan: so, so I think, you know, we need to peel one layer down, right? and the philosophy is, Hey, we, we just discovered electricity, right? And you know what we're gonna do? We are gonna make motors, uh, or dynamos, right? Like engines. Uh, sure. We don't know if it's gonna be a Ferrari that you're gonna make, or it's a a a a dump truck. [00:08:57] Anush Elangovan: That's good for doing this. But let's [00:09:00] let, which is also required, right? You need a dump truck. You need a garbage truck. And, [00:09:04] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. You need the [00:09:04] Anush Elangovan: course you need, uh, a Ferrari for a midlife crisis, right? So, [00:09:09] Andrew Zigler: precisely. [00:09:10] Anush Elangovan: But, but my, uh, point is what do we build next? And, uh, and this is what I meant by like, okay, let's, let's take those baby steps to build the. [00:09:20] Anush Elangovan: Infrastructure that's required that we know we'll have to use, right? So, so if I just discovered electricity, okay, great. Now one, how do I save this electricity and how do I use it? So there's battery technology, so you need to do something like that, right? Like so. But then you also want to make it into an actionable thing. [00:09:37] Anush Elangovan: You want to make it for like automobiles, or you wanna use it for, you know, powering, uh, entire cities. So it is that transformational. So, uh, AI is that transformational. So, if you distill down, it'll, it'll come down to how do we think about, what we can do with this this fundamental technology that, We may not be aware of what it [00:10:00] is gonna unlock next, but at least you know the next step is clear, right? It's like a dense fog, you know, it's gonna be like, it, it's the right path. You see the light, but it's kind of like out there and, and the steps you're taking are concrete and you're like, okay, this is good. [00:10:16] Anush Elangovan: I, this is better than where I was or where we were. So we are moving forward. So you can build with the. Intuition from what you see in the short term and a tactical view, but towards what you think the future is gonna be. [00:10:28] Andrew Zigler: Right. You almost like we're all in this like fog of war, right? And like you said, you're reaching out and you're trying to step through it. You could think of it too, as like you're in the dark and your hands are up in front of you and you know that. You're, you're not gonna run your face into a wall because your hands are out in front of you, but you're not gonna maybe do much better than that. [00:10:45] Andrew Zigler: So that's kind of like, I think the eco, the, the industry, the world that we find ourselves in, uh, and we all have to, then this becomes the power of an ecosystem, of a group of people working together to create that layer of, [00:11:00] uh, of establishing the [00:11:01] Anush Elangovan: exactly. And I, I, I just, instead of, you know, saying fog of war I describe it as like, you're in this. Beautiful valley with like a morning, uh, fog that's in. You can smell the flowers. You, you hear the birds. You are like, okay, it's, we are in like, uh, utopian paradise and yes, I just need to like, continue the walk, right? [00:11:24] Anush Elangovan: and then move forward with that, conviction that you're in the right spot. [00:11:27] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. So let's talk about that ecosystem world. This nice, I love how you describe it, this grassy side of a hill in the morning that's covered in some mist and maybe we can't see 30 feet in one direction, but it sure is a beautiful hill and it smells nice. And so we're all here. And why is, in that world, why is. [00:11:44] Andrew Zigler: You know, open source, their strategic advantage that y'all are going for in the AI hardware market. And, and then how does like ROCm turn that into wins for people within that ecosystem? [00:11:56] Anush Elangovan: you know, the, the way we look at it is this, is kind of like how I view [00:12:00] AI and the ecosystem, right? But, but it is for everyone to enjoy. Uh, and so we do want to make sure that. You know, it is, uh, beneficial for everyone. [00:12:09] Anush Elangovan: The ecosystem can come in and, and innovate. It's an open innovation engine. and uh, it is very different from, you know, having a walled garden with, Hey, only I know how to do this and I'm gonna do it and throw it over the fence and you can use it or keep walking, right? So we'd like to be good citizens that way, but also. [00:12:30] Anush Elangovan: Uh, it is self-fulfilling in a way, right? Like it, the, the pace at which we innovate with open source is unmatched. Like, you know, our serving engines are like VLLM and, and sg l. Those things, uh, those frameworks are like super, super aggressive in terms of how fast they come out with features and how fast they can you know, get performant models out. [00:12:52] Anush Elangovan: And that compared with what, uh, you'd get from, you know, the likes of like T-R-T-L-L-M or something is always lagging, right? Because you [00:13:00] just can't keep up with you know, 200 commits a week just on one particular model to get that model really performant [00:13:06] Andrew Zigler: And, and, and in that world where, you know, everyone can enjoy the winds of this, what kind of customer stories or innovation stories have really stood out to you and excite you about building and creating this place for developers? [00:13:19] Anush Elangovan: Yeah. So I think the parts that are super exciting for me are when when we get to see a customer that is first skeptical. Then they start a little like, okay, fine, we'll give you a chance. Uh, we do a simple, uh, POC and then they're like, huh, this seems to work. Yeah, we told you it works. [00:13:42] Anush Elangovan: You don't have to change one line of code. Really? Yes, no need to change one line of code. Okay, let's try a production workload. So then they try it. Oh, you're more performant than the competition. Yes. We're more performant than, than the competition. So how much does it cost? And we're like, oh, it's your TCO is better with, uh, [00:14:00] AMD. [00:14:00] Anush Elangovan: So again, they're like, wow, okay, good. So now how do we deploy at scale? And then we go deploy it at scale. And when they give a thumbs up on that and they say, this is good, right? That's when you know, you, you see it go full circle from like, oh, we, we've never heard about AMD to like actually deploy to tens of thousands of GPUs In the order of a few months, right? It, it, it really is fascinating to see and very exciting and invigorating to [00:14:28] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. At like a great exposure to a lot of interesting problems. And, and then people using the infrastructure, the, the technology available to solve those problems. Really specific problems by the way, that's often why they're bringing their data and AI to it, uh, is because it is really specific and important for them. [00:14:45] Andrew Zigler: And there's a, a lot I think that other engineering orgs can learn and even emulate from AMD's success and, and having this open source ecosystem and it causing this acceleration within. You [00:15:00] know, uh, customers and enterprises that use and adopt the tools and, and, and that creates an advantage. And that goes back to why we're talking and like the real thesis of our conversation today. [00:15:10] Andrew Zigler: So how do you think engineering leaders that are listening to this and obviously tapping into this great success AMD has from an open source flywheel, how do you think other, other folks building in the same space can foster that open, first, that open source oriented culture in order to, you know, accelerate their innovation goals? [00:15:29] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So the startup that um, was acquired by AMD we, we built, I mean, we started off doing iot stuff and you know, smart ring and all that, right? But in the, the end of like, uh, and not the end, the last six years of the company was building ML compilers. [00:15:47] Anush Elangovan: And ml, ML compilers are like super, uh, complicated, sophisticated, advanced algorithms, dah, dah, dah. but it was all open source, right? So our VCs were like, wait, what do you mean your core [00:16:00] IP is open source? And um, the speed is the moat applied even then, right? It was just like, yes, if you have an idea that. [00:16:08] Anush Elangovan: Because someone saw this idea that you are, they're gonna be able to catch up, then you probably have the wrong idea anyway. But if they are, you know, you execute and they're gonna catch up, that you should assume they're gonna catch up. Right? So you gotta move forward. So keeping it open source is super important. [00:16:25] Anush Elangovan: But also to your question on like, you know, the learnings from an AMD standpoint, right? If there are, hard problems, I'd say dig in and work through it, right? Like there's no way but through it, right? That should be the simple mentality. And more, uh, frequently than not. you'll see that you'll just make it through in a, in, in good form. [00:16:52] Anush Elangovan: But if you doubt it and you're like, oh, I don't know if I should commit, if I'm, I, you know, what should just commit to do the right thing [00:17:00] every step, right? Every step, and just keep taking one step in front of the other. And in no time you'll see that you'll be running. Right. And, and yes, the first few steps will be like, yeah, everyone's complaining about your software quality. [00:17:15] Anush Elangovan: Everyone's complaining about this and that, and it doesn't work. And, and a few steps in, you know, you get, you get the hang of all the complaints that are coming in. You get the feedback loop. You're like, okay, what, what are you prioritizing again? One step in front of the other, right? You just keep knocking that out and then you get to a point where you're, it just becomes second nature, right? To do the, to do the right thing. And, and then yes, if someone gives you two options, you'll be like, fine. This is, uh, you know, there's always the resource trade off. There's always a human capital trade off, but what's the right thing to do? of course, I, I'm pragmatic about what we choose, but, but if the right thing for your long-term success is dig in, go first, principles, make it [00:18:00] happen. [00:18:00] Anush Elangovan: Well. Then just go for that. There's, there is no shortcut to [00:18:04] Andrew Zigler: acknowledging, you know, how it aligns with your mission, your core company goals, and what you're looking to achieve. And, and I, I love how you rightfully called out that in the open source world and you know, you have your technology that you've built, what you think is your moat upon, right? [00:18:22] Andrew Zigler: It's your code and, and to open source that, or to just make it where anyone could peer in is, you know. Scary in one regard, but two, it just kind of feels like you're handing away your throne room in some kind of sense, a very direct feeling sense. But the ultimately, you were really right to call out, and this is something I think about all the time, that the real power there is still the speed This the speed. [00:18:42] Andrew Zigler: That was the moat at the beginning of our conversation. It's the speed in combination with your. Very specific domain understanding of what you're building and what you're creating, and your new role as the steward of that world and how people plug into it, which [00:19:00] has frankly, a lot more influence and power than lording over a closed. [00:19:04] Andrew Zigler: You know, repository or an ecosystem, and like you said, like throwing things over the wall. Sure. There, there might be people always on the other side of that wall, but you're not gonna have a great connection with them. You're not gonna be able to really clearly understand them. I, I like your metaphor of the side of the field of the mountain a lot more. [00:19:23] Andrew Zigler: But, but in the, in this world, you know, where. That speed is, is the power and, and open source is just one way that you can harness that speed to get really far ahead and to innovate. , There's other parts of this equation that you can be experimenting with too, and I'd love to pick your brain about them as a software leader and, and, and one of them is about looking forward and kind of understanding that future that we're all building towards and beyond today's models and hardware. [00:19:48] Andrew Zigler: You know, what do you see as the next major bottleneck or opportunity in the AI compute space? As, as you know, enterprises and folks start to get a little more mature about what's available to [00:20:00] them. [00:20:00] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, I think, the bottleneck and opportunity is, uh, what I'd call, call walking the last mile of ai. Right. Uh, and like I I, I gave you an example, uh, previously, but, but it's similar to that. It's like there are cases where Humans have so many, uh, things to do in your day. You know, like the, if we sit down and actually had a customer focus like, okay, these customers lives, I'm gonna save four hours of this customer's life. And if you actually sit down and look at all of that, it'll be. Easily automatable, easily you know, uh, applicable, uh, for ai, right? [00:20:39] Anush Elangovan: Like, but then making it happen is gonna take a little bit, right? It's like maybe it's, uh, paying your utility bill, right? Or something like that, right? Or, or, your healthcare explanation of benefits. Uh, like, I'm sure you get an explanation of benefits, and I'm like, I, I don't even know what that thing is. [00:20:55] Anush Elangovan: It's just like EOB and like. [00:20:57] Andrew Zigler: it's a big, a big old PDF. Yeah, [00:21:00] exactly. [00:21:01] Anush Elangovan: Like, like, I'm like great straight to the, uh, shredder, right? And but that could be, you know, automated with the ai, right? It, it, it'd be like, Hey, the summary of this thing is you went and visited this day. Everything is okay. Everything is paid for, so don't worry, it's not a bill. [00:21:17] Anush Elangovan: That again, the same, uh, thing, but the sense of what that information overload is could be. Digested by ai, uh, accumulated over time and retrieved when you need it. Like, I don't, I actually don't even need to know this EOB right now, unless of course, whenever I need to know it, that maybe, you know, like for some benefits I need to figure out what do, what did I do over the past year and how do I apply it? Source:

Mike

14,195 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

The story of the persistent footballer and the cold car racer starring Sea Dechchart and Keen Suvijak ⚽️🏎️ (original work of Keenkeeno) ♡ #sea_ta_lay #keenkeno ♡ #seakeen #ซีคีน ♡ 🦞: the story will start with cool football game, and Keen will be the coach5555555 using his brain etc.. and walk around while fixing his glasses, then as Sea was running…. 🦞: you can play so well, very good, your form is getting better 🦦: wai 🙏🏻 thank you Coach! 🦞: hey it’s okay, we’re the same age, no need to wai, just chill~ you’re so talented na~ I’m not really good, I just graduated from Bachelor Degree of Sport Science, specialize in analyzing people and various playing skills. I know how angle of impact work etc… 🦦: (become very interested and wanted to become his direct disciple) 🦞: if you want to be disciple you have to go to the mountains….the Talay Koong Mountains 🦞( is the very hard to find master, hence he open the American Football Academy that is on top of the Talay Koong Mountains, and the area is not so big just 10 rai. There is just a shack, while the rest is just the area to practice) 🦞( while Keen was sitting and playing music, Sea who really wanted to become his disciple climbing 1808 (as Keen’s birthday) steps to beg Keen to become his disciple. As Sea got up there, Keen said…) 🦞: you can’t, you have to pass the challenge first 🦞: you have to run 1808 km 🦦: I can do it Master! But can you reduce it a little for me? 🦞: no, if you really want to be my disciple you have to show the full determination. 🦦( starts to running, as Sea is showing full determination Keen decides to reduce the distance, then he asked Sea) 🦞: when is your birthday? 🦦: 0305! 🦞: 0305 right? It’s okay I will reduce it for you, from the 1808. Let’s flip the 0305 into 5030km! 🦦: oh Master! It’s that too much? 🦞: hey, if you’re determined the 5000km is just easy peasy. 🦦( suddenly understood what his Master trying to teach the philosophy of playing, the passing ball backward and forward by the flipping numbers ) 🦦 : I got it Master! 🦞( the next challenge is thumb wrestling battle, Sea needs to win against Keen to become his disciple. During the first round Keen won. If Keen win again Sea needs to run) 🦦: Master, I can’t do it anymore. Can’t you go easy on me at all? 🦞: I’m training you, so that you will be strong. If you want to compete in Champion League you need to be strong enough to run 10000km in one day 🦦: oh, I got it now Master 🦦( finally won against the Master and got accepted as his disciples ) 🦦: why my Master is so handsome. You’re like a divine being that descends on earth. 🦞: that’s not true, don’t flatter me that much. Even though it’s the truth I wont pass the secret technique to you. 🦞( Master is sulking, because he didn’t speak the truth) 🦞: I know I’m good looking but you’re also good looking, you can’t flatter me like this, because it’s not a good thing. 🦞: let’s part ways, you’re already good and ready for the Champion Superior League. 🦦( go down 1808 down the mountain and meet his friends) 👤: hey, where have you been? (The Talay Koong Mountains mysteriously disappeared!) 🦦( suddenly woke up, Sea already fall for him from the first sight and the skills that he learned was actually real, he got stronger and can play American football better) 🦞( Keen was watching Sea from a far) (CONT ⬇️)

นีนี่ 🌻ft. พี่นินิกับน้องชีวา 🔭🌌

30,606 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

꒰ ˶• ̫ •˶꒱ა /っ っ DARE YOU TO DEATH #จุงดัง #JoongDunk #DareYouToDeath …testing Joong–Dunk’s interrogation skills 👀🔍 with the game “if you’re good enough catch me!” * round 2 🐶there’s no way Dunk could know this for sure 🐶it’s me this one…. 🐶to🐱: there’s no way to know - you can’t beat me 🐱for me this one…. 🐶alright Dunk you ask first 🐱in this series did i act together with you 🐶in this series you didn’t act together with me 🐱there you go - how about that - you know that’s an advanced question 🐶ah then let me ask you back: in this series is the character still a student 🐱yeah still a student 🐶okay 🐱this character — are they good at using their body / physical skills 🐶yeah good at using their body - very good too 🐱ohoo ohyeah — i know it now 🐶this character of yours — are he human? 🐱maybe not yet 🐱 Oh no - he is human just kidding 🐶 human? 🐱yeah they are human 🐱okay does this character have a partner in the story? 🐶yeah he has a partner but maybe not yet - not officially a couple yet - might not be lovers 🐱ah i think i know 🐶oh 🐱go ahead but the point is — i don’t know the name 🐱oh i know i know - hey let me answer Tony 🐶hey 🐱is that right? 🐶correct!! what story - do you know what series ???… 🐱the Warp Effect right? 🐶 yeah good… x3 🐱okay i almost forgot this character 🐶if it’s Dunk’s right? this character…rich? 🐱not told in the story but also not struggling 🐶is he a mischievous person? 🐱sometimes 🐶at some points so can skip that part because that person is always playful 🐱oh got it i understand - got it in the heart 🐶i have 2 choices if not Daonuea - it’s nong Zo 🐶is his faen/lover rich? 🐱not struggling 🐶not struggling? 🐱yeah not struggling 🐶 but also not Khabkluen - Khabkluen is extremely rich so not Khabkluen 🐶it could be this person. it could be that person too *🐱is Khabkluen rich? *🐱i don’t know 🐱let’s ask again - change the question to another one 🐶is their age between 18 and 22? 🐱that’s about it. 🐶that’s about it!? 🐶let’s go with Zo? not Zo huh? 🐶oh who Daonuea? 🐱 Daonuea 🐶that’s why i asked “does this character have a rich lover?” 🐱there’s been some memory mistakes - it’s been many years 5 years already : how has it been working together for 5 years? 🐱honestly it’s a new experience, something even Dunk hasn’t felt before. even after 5 years it still feels new - growing from school/university age to working age. now roles include assassins - police… it’s a very new experience - enjoying these 5 years 🐶i feel these 5 years the graph keeps rising, so much fun getting new roles every year. Filming this project is very different from others because meeting new directors - JoongDunk meet new directors every project 🐱the main challenge for Dunk is the role Kaminn. it’s full of official police terminology - very hard and challenging because it cannot be altered, must be precise. must understand police procedures, workshops, guns, action moves… many challenges but very fun 🐶this is a project i really want everyone to watch to see how it turns out 🐱please support the series DYTD

🇻🇳Jaidee’s aunt Bamnie🐣

12,751 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

I think it’s time to talk about it 🙂‍↕️ I was delaying it because the scene messed me up in every possible way. From the moment he entered the room panting in anger, to the moment he subconsciously hid her behind his back to protect her when he heard the Kordağlıs were coming. When he entered the room like that (and he even knocked, but… since when does Serhat knock? 🌚), he scared her, because a part of her knew exactly how crazy this would make him. Because despite everything he did, despite the divorces and all the silence, she always knew he cared. And hell… he DID 😭 Serhat shouting “You can’t marry” in the same place where he once told her “It’s your life, I’m not responsible for it”??? C I N E M A! Yıldız gasping, crying, trying to catch her breath while arguing… #BiranDamlaYılmaz , you did NOT have to be this perfect 😭 When she said “Bir kere sen çıldır, yeter,” she was at her limit. There was that tiny second of silence while she was desperately gasping, and he just looked at her, helpless, not knowing how to save both of them from this mess. Y: You gave up on me. S: No, YOU gave up on me. With all disrespect… Sir??? I know he didn’t mean to hurt her, I know he was hurting too, but accusing HER of giving up, when from her POV he is the one who let go? She is the only one living in uncertainty from day one. He can’t expect her to read his mind. When she asked him to say he didn’t give up on her… imagine his position. Everything she said, he wanted to agree with. “I didn’t give up on you. I remember kissing you. I was about to divorce Melek and marry you.” He was swallowing everything, suffering in silence, because in his mind saying that would be selfish. He was still trying to avoid that red zone. NOW. THE MIRROR SCENE. First of all, why is no one talking about how he grabbed her with ONE HAND without even looking at her? He knew exactly where she was. Her surprised gasp?? His husky voice??? #ilhanşen canım abim, if you continue like this, Serhat will be the last character I watch from you because I will ascend to heaven. Have mercy on me big boy 🌚 Making them watch themselves in the mirror was WILD, Ercan hocam. If the scene was 100% intense, the mirror made it 10000%. His hand on her waist, her looking so tiny. His other hand slowly moving her hair. His face on her head next to her ear, sniffing her scent, looking… lustful, angry, desperate. The mix of desire and rage in his eyes??? EXCUSE ME??? He didn’t even touch the tattoo on her chest. He was locking her in place, making sure she couldn’t escape (as if she could). When he turned her around, he kept her trapped in his arms. He wasn’t testing her. He KNOWS she loves him. He was trying to speak without words. “This is what I feel. I messed up. But this is what I want.” But she needed words. She DESERVED words. He definitely was going for a kiss , and she pulled away. Because she is angry. Hurt. M convinced her she is a burden, and he never denied it with words. His silence confirmed everything in her mind. When he closed his eyes in that silence, realising that by trying to protect her with silence, he destroyed her AGAIN! Her cracked voice saying, “You still didn’t say you didn’t give up on me,” I wanted to hug her and cry until sunrise 😭 Then she put her strong mask back on, telling him not to enter her room like that, because she will soon be engaged💔 And btw, I’m 100% sure if it wasn’t for the Kordağlıs, he would NOT have left without kissing her. In my head, they kissed. There is no universe where Serhat left that room untouched after that tension. I tried my best to write with my sanity on! Just an advice 👀 try to catch ilhan’s panting in the beginning 🤤 they are delicious🫦 I know it turned out to be too long but the scene is quite long and full of details. I am sure I still can talking about it with another essay🤣 but I won’t don’t worry. #HalefKöklerinÇağrısı #Yılser

Maurora🫦

25,206 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

‡ The Pacific Classic Result It was unfortunate that Nysos was scratched, but the result was interesting, with Fierceness, the 1.6/1 second-favorite, comfortably handling Journalism, the (overbet) 2/5 choice. That the odds of the remaining five runners ranged between 22/1 and 72/1, underscored the yawning gap in quality between the top pair and the rest. So it was clearly no surprise that the "also-rans" toiled in their wake. What was surprising, at least at first glance, was how well Fierceness appeared to handle less than ideal conditions. But on closer inspection, his trip was actually far less challenging than the vast majority of post-race takes have suggested. His having ducked in soon after the start, almost making contact with the temporary extension rail, could have been a disaster, but it wasn't, and its importance has arguably been overblown. I say that because it was not similar to the trouble that he had encountered early in some of his previous races, in that he was in his own space, and was neither bumped, constricted, nor otherwise intimidated by other runners. This is an important distinction, because the mental weakness that he had previously displayed was related to close encounters with other horses, and his ducking-in after the break did not fall into that category. Inexperienced horses may suffer from that type of self-inflicted event, but given a mature, experienced runner, they are almost always forgotten quickly, which was clearly the case here. The fact that it was a long race also helped to mitigate the event, as there was no need for the rider to panic, or feel pressure to make up ground immediately. It is even possible that the early ground loss actually helped Fierceness, as had he been drawn closer to the pace early, it could have rendered him vulnerable in the late stages of the race. At the same time, due to the inside post, and how the race unfolded, Johnny Velasquez, who has done such a brilliant job keeping Fierceness outside and clear of his rivals in his previous wins, was forced to make the best of racing inside of horses. I understand why some are tempted to argue that Fierceness displayed a new dimension, as there were no obvious signs of him having been intimidated, despite the inside trip. But while I am willing to consider the possibility that he has gained confidence, I remain skeptical of any significant change, in part because it would be highly unusual for a horse to overcome that type of mental weakness midway through its four-year-old season, and/or in its 13th start. I also remain unconvinced for more subtle reasons. First, Fierceness was never bounced around, and with the possible exception of the first turn, he was never forced to race in especially tight quarters. Secondly, the rhythm of the race, after the initial duck-in, was actually smooth, and therefore beneficial to him. To understand why the above points are important, consider that Fierceness was never, so to speak, allergic to racing inside, but was more likely to face contact, be squeezed into a tight space, or have his rhythm thrown off when breaking from an inside post. In contrast, when breaking from an outside post, JV has invariably been able to place him clear of the pack, and in a comfortable, stalking rhythm. Fierceness is also essentially a free-runner, with a "light" mouth, and as such performs best when his rider allows him to dictate his own rhythm and pace. That is why, for example, Johnny V was not at all responsible for his loss in the Breeders' Cup Classic, as he is not the type of horse that a rider can take a strong hold of in order to restrain him further off of the pace, as that would discourage him. And to the great credit of both JV and Todd Pletcher, they picked up on this early on, and have done a superb job mitigating the colt's limitations, and maximizing his potential. In the Pacific Classic, despite racing on the inside, Johnny V remained cool and calm, and gave Fierceness another masterful ride. He and the colt's connections did benefit though, as none of his rivals, either intentionally or not, tightened things up significantly, or otherwise disrupted his rhythm. In fact, quite the opposite. Having tracked comfortably through much of the race, and with space around him, Fierceness displayed his trademark spurt on the final turn. And while the pan shot may suggest that he slipped though a tight opening, it was more like the red sea parting, as the embedded head-on view illustrates. If you are able to view the full head-on replay, you will find that despite racing inside, Fierceness actually enjoyed quite a comfortable trip, after the eventful few strides. A more subtle indication that we were watching the same horse as in his previous races comes :12-14 seconds into the embedded clip. When he was about to take the lead, he cocked his head to the right, as if he may have been worried about the horse outside of him. He was able to draw away from that one so quickly that it was ultimately of no practical consequence, but I would say that it implies that he hasn't suddenly developed the heart of a lion. *** Two qualities that have been crucial to Fierceness' success are his tactical speed, coupled with the separation that he produces on the final turn of his (two-turn) races. His ability to take command at that crucial stage has served him very well, particularly in his narrow win over Thorpedo Anna, and it was again on display in the Pacific Classic. A big part of the reason why that move has been such an important part of his arsenal is that it typically allows his him to take a "breather", before digging deep in an effort to fend off any late dangers. I encourage you to watch the (pan) replay of the Pacific Classic, and focus on Johnny V from around the 3/8th pole to the head of the stretch, as he was sitting like the proverbial statue. So for at least a furlong and a half, Fierceness was on cruise control, while Journalism, his only danger, was under pressure to make up ground, in an attempt to simply reach striking distance. But with all due credit to Fierceness and his rider for having produced fine efforts in the Pacific Classic, was this really an exceptionally outstanding performance, or was it at least partly a reflection of his only serious rival failing to run his best? I'm inclined to argue the latter. Despite Journalism having produced an unusually good 3yo campaign, capped by three Gr. I wins, including a Classic success in the Preakness, and never finishing worse than second, there have been some lingering questions. One of them is whether he is actually as well-suited to 10f. as he is to 8-9f. races. Yes, he was beaten in his two previous tries over 10f. by Sovereignty, a better horse. But in each race he was able to gain first-run on that one, an advantage that is typically difficult to overcome, yet lost ground late to the winner both times, and to Baeza as well, in the KY Derby. Some have suggested that he may have a tendency to loaf when in front, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence of that. And such horses typically dig in when passed, in efforts to re-engage, which we haven't seen, at least overtly, from Journalism. He also drew away from his rivals late in his first three wins. Alex Evers made this interesting comment about the kickback in the Pacific Classic: "I've photographed racing for 20 years, I've never seen kick back knock a jockeys goggles off like this." Here is a link to his supporting photos, which are typically excellent: Could that have discouraged Journalism? I suppose that it could have been an impediment, but he is such a tough and honest horse, that I would be surprised to learn that it was a meaningful factor. By contemporary standards, Journalism has also had a busy campaign, having raced a touch over once per month since March, all but one of which in Grade I events, and four times well away from his home base. So it is possible that he is beginning to feel the effects of those races, and travels. I have also noted that from a Beyer figure standpoint, he hasn't really moved forward, and it's worth noting that in contrast to Sovereignty and Baeza, both of which were late (May) foals, Journalism was a February foal, and may not have had quite as much room to improve. I don't know why he lagged so far behind in the early stages of the Pacific Classic, or if there was any tactical intention behind it. I had previously suggested that it might make sense to ride him more patiently, a tactic that is sometimes adopted when there are questions about a horse staying a trip. But I didn't notice any improved late kick, so it's difficult to interpret the performance. Fierceness earned a 107 Beyer figure for his victory, slower than his best three races last year, and merely equivalent to his comeback victory in the Gr. II Alysheba at Churchill Downs, in May. That doesn't suggest that it was a particularly outstanding performance. Journalism was given a 102, which implies that the return to his home court did not catalyze any notable forward move. *** I would say that there is one relevant pattern that has emerged, namely that Fierceness has an apparent affinity for the faster, high energy return track surfaces in California. He has now contested three races in CA (Beyer): 1st Breeders' Cup Juvenile (105) 2nd Breeders' Cup Classic (111) 1st Pacific Classic (107) It's also interesting to compare the colt's first and last half-mile fractions in his effort in last year's BCC, and the PC, both contested at Del Mar over 10f.: BCC – :45 1/5 • :51 3/5 PC – :46 1/5 • :50 2/5 Predictably, he finished better in the PC, thanks to more manageable early fractions. But would a repeat of that effort be nearly sufficient to win this year's Classic? Given the various points noted above, coupled with Sovereignty's continued improvement, and seemingly bottomless stamina, I would be inclined to say no. And that's before even factoring Sierra Leone, Mindframe, Forever Young, et al, into the conversation. But setting aside all of the fine parsing, I'm happy to congratulate Repole Stable, and Fierceness' other connections, for having shipped to California, and for being rewarded with an exciting, winning effort. Assuming that the colt makes it to the Breeders' Cup Classic in good order, he should minimally add spice to the race, and who knows, perhaps even provide a serious challenge to knock Sovereignty off of his current throne.

Tinky

10,516 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

Dear Friend, I wrote this book for you. For the past year, I have labored to create a product that will help you learn and master SQL. I have been there. I have felt the frustration of trying to learn SQL and not knowing where to begin. I have lived through the struggle of setting up a platform to run SQL queries. Most platforms require sign-ups and logins that create a headache for learners. I also know the challenge of finding proper SQL exercises that mirror the real-world experience of a data analyst. Yes, I have been in your shoes. That’s why I created SQL Essentials for Data Analysis: A 50-Day Hands-on Challenge Book (Go From Beginner to Pro). Yes, to give you a clear, practical path from beginner to confident SQL user. ✅Why SQL Still Matters You may be wondering if SQL still matters in 2025. The answer: it has never mattered more. SQL is the lingua franca of data. Data still lives in databases, and the only language it truly understands is SQL. Think about it, even in Python, SQL is there. You’ve probably heard about the powerful pandas library. Guess what? It also has some SQL. And don’t get me started on BigQuery, Tableau, Power BI, and Databricks; the answer is the same: they all rely on SQL. SQL is the big shadow that hovers over everything data. This is why learning SQL is a must for data analysts, engineers, scientists, and anyone working with data. SQL connects everything: exploration, extraction, transformation, modeling, validation, and reporting. ✅Why I Wrote This Book Dear friend, I wanted to create a resource that gives you everything you need to learn SQL for data analysis. Quite often, resources are scattered across different places. You might learn theory in one place, search for datasets in another, and hunt for questions somewhere else. More often than not, the only place you can tackle SQL challenges is online. But online platforms usually focus on syntax and don’t reflect the messiness of real-world data. I wrote this book to give you the best of both worlds: theory and practice. I don’t want you to be worrying about where to find resources. I want you to focus only on learning SQL. If you are new to SQL or need a refresher on the fundamentals, Part 1 of the book has you covered. If you are looking for practice, Part 2 is 49 days of hands-on SQL challenges designed to mirror real-world tasks. Each day in the book is designed to feel like a mini project, rather than isolated exercises. Take Day 15: Standardize Climbers Data, for example: On this day, you’re not just writing a single query; you’re working with a dataset from start to finish. By combining these tasks, you experience a full data preprocessing workflow, just like a real project. You get to practice loading, transforming, cleaning, and validating data, all in one challenge. This approach makes every day a hands-on project, not just an isolated query. You’re learning how SQL is used in real-world scenarios, not just memorizing syntax. By the end of each day, you’ve solved a problem that feels meaningful and practical: yes, something that mirrors data analysts’ and engineers’ work in real life. In this book I use SQLite. I chose SQLite because it’s simple, lightweight, and runs on any system without complicated setups or cloud accounts. You don’t need to worry about complex configurations. SQLite allows you to focus entirely on learning SQL concepts, queries, and logic without distractions. You will just have to import it. I also structured the book for use in Jupyter or Google Colab notebooks. These are playgrounds for data analysts, engineers, and scientists. These environments are interactive and flexible. They let you run queries, visualize results, and experiment in real time. Using notebooks ensures that you can practice SQL while documenting your work and learning at your own pace, all in one place. No need for sign-ups. ✅Why 50 Days? I chose 50 days intentionally. Learning SQL isn’t a sprint; it’s a habit. You can’t truly master a language by cramming a few queries in one sitting. 50 days creates a commitment. You attach yourself to a goal, a tangible outcome. Every day is a small win, a step forward, and by the end of the journey, you’ve transformed your understanding of SQL. By spreading the learning over 50 days, you build momentum, consistency, and confidence. Think of it like training for a marathon. You don’t run 26 miles on the first day. You run a little each day, gradually building strength, endurance, and skill. By the end of the 50 days, you’ll have tackled a wide range of SQL tasks: from simple filtering to window functions, date operations, joins, and performance tuning. You’ll have not just learned SQL but truly internalized it. The goal isn’t to overwhelm you. It’s to give you a structured, achievable path that fits into your daily routine, so learning SQL becomes natural, steady, and rewarding. Even if you don’t finish within 50 days, the 50-day structure gives you a rhythm, a habit, and a sense of accomplishment. The kind of outcome that sticks long after the book is finished. In summary, I wrote the book to address these pain points: 🔶Not knowing where to start: The book gives you a clear roadmap that guides you day by day. 🔶Too much theory, not enough practice: Reading about SQL is not the same as doing SQL. This book includes hands-on challenges that mirror real-world scenarios, so you’re not just memorizing commands; you’re learning to think like a data analyst. 🔶Complex setup: Many learners get stuck setting up databases or configuring environments. You will not worry about complex setups; everything runs in SQLite3 inside Jupyter Notebook, so you start immediately. 🔶Disconnected learning: The challenges mirror real-world analytics problems. Every day here is like a mini project, giving you the experience of exploring, cleaning, transforming, and analyzing data ✅What I ask of You I wrote this book for you because I want you to succeed, but books alone don’t create mastery; your effort does. I have provided the tools. All I ask is that you show up every day. Even if it’s just 20–30 minutes, take the challenge seriously. Tackle the problems, experiment with your queries, make mistakes, and fix them. That’s how real learning happens. I also ask that you trust the process. The book is designed to guide you from beginner to confident SQL user, step by step. Some days will feel "easy" and others "hard." Stay the course, and by the end, you’ll see how all the pieces fit together. Finally, I ask that you bring curiosity and persistence. SQL is a language of logic and structure, but it’s also a language of insight. The more you explore, the more patterns you’ll discover, and the more confident you’ll become in solving real-world problems. Don’t be scared to experiment. If you commit to this, I promise you’ll finish 50 days with more than just knowledge. You’ll have the skills, confidence, and habit of thinking like a data analyst. To make starting even easier, as a subscriber to this newsletter, I’m giving you an exclusive 35% launch discount. You can grab your copy today and start the 50-day journey at a reduced price. Grab SQL Essentials for Data Analysis here: I can’t wait to hear about your progress, the insights you uncover, and the confidence you gain along the way. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me or post them in the comments section. Let’s start this journey together: one challenge, one query, one day at a time. Warmly, Benjamin PS. Please repost.

Benjamin Bennett Alexander

16,883 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

Zack Polanski on BBC Radio 4's Today prog calmly knocking back everything Nick Robinson throws at him across 17 minutes NR (00:00.2), "Delighted to say that Zach Polanski is here in the Today programme studio, for the latest, indeed, for the last of our party leader interviews. Morning to you and thanks for coming in." ZP (00:09.2), "Thanks for having me." NR (00:09.8), "Nick, I want to talk to you about what your party would do if it does indeed gain some power after the votes on Thursday. But I want to begin by putting to you one of the latest storeys about you. A Times investigation says that you've made a series of false or disputed claims about jobs you've had in the past with." NR (00:31.8), "Why, for example, did you say you were a spokesperson for the British Red Cross when they are absolutely clear that, though a supporter of theirs, you were never a spokesperson for them?" ZP (00:42.3), "So I hosted, various fundraisers for the British Red Cross and indeed I would go on stage and speak for them about the amazing work they do tackling humanitarian crises, on the climate crisis and indeed for refugees all around the world. I use the wrong word and I accept that." ZP (00:57.5), "But I would essentially take words on stage with me and speak. It's important, though, and I accept this, that, you know, I don't support any political party and I've made sure that's been taken down." NR (01:06.5), "You say this sort of storey is a fuss about nothing, that you get your facts wrong because it comes up with other examples." ZP (01:11.7), "Well, I think it's totally fine to ask me questions about my past. I would also say in the same breath, though the Times published a pretty anti Semitic cartoon of me last week. I asked them to apologise. And it feels some of these storeys feel like scraping the barrel to kind of go back 10, 15 years. I've had so many friends, I'm literally talking maybe 20 or 30 in the last few weeks who have phoned me and said, a Times journalist has been phoning and they've been desperately trying, trying to find things about your past." ZP (01:36.5), "They asked me lots of questions and seemed disappointed that I didn't have some juicy, dirty gossip." NR (01:41.6), "Yeah, well, there was. Whether you call it juicy or dirty, and it wasn't gossip, it was a fact. The fact that you claimed that as a hypnotherapist, you could enlarge women's breasts using the power of thought. People are entitled to say, what's this guy really about?" ZP (01:57.2), "People are totally entitled to say that. And that's an important part of politics, that people ask you questions. What I would say is that, you know, this was 13 years ago. It was a Sun journalist's idea. I've apologised for that. Because even though it was a son journalist idea, I was an adult and I should have said no, you went along with it." NR (02:12.6), "Yeah." ZP (02:12.9), "It's important to say I wasn't a politician. And I've apologised for it repeatedly." NR (02:16.7), "And the BBC showed that some days later, in fact, you repeated the claim that you could do it. But let us not get bogged down in the past. It is striking, though, that on X last night, when, let's be honest, people who are critics of you are having a go. The Daily Mail calls it the Green Menace on its front page." NR (02:34.1), "How did you react? You said you were under relentless attacks because they, your critics don't want a wealth tax, don't want public ownership. They're trying everything in their power to stop us, you said. It's a curious thing to say, isn't it? Ahead of local elections, Green councillors will not have the power to implement any of those policies, will they?" ZP (02:54.8), "Well, I think the relentless attacks on the Green Party in this election, for a local election have partly been about the local election, but really they're about the bigger picture right now. The bigger picture is when I ran to be leader of the Green party, we had 50,000 members, we've now got 225,000 members. So we are rising." ZP (03:11.1), "And I think lots of people are worried about the prospect. And when I say people, people who own, right wing media, multimillionaires and billionaires who are worried about the prospect that they might have to pay a little bit more tax. And so I think it's important that I focus on the vision and the hope and our actual plan." ZP (03:27.4), "I also think it's a complete reality, though we've seen it in the past before with left wing leaders, that there's no secret, there's no love lost between me and the right wing media. And almost every single day they print things that just aren't true." NR (03:38.8), "But just address the point I raised. Wealth tax councils won't get to do that. Public ownership councils don't get to do that. Well, not entirely. We'll come to that in a second. You are running on a national platform of change that the people who are elected on Thursday, whether in the Welsh Parliament, you don't run candidates in the Scottish one, or in English, local councils simply cannot do." ZP (04:03.2), "Well, I think it's about what are your values as a party? And whilst other party leaders and other parties take donations from oil and gas companies or arms trade companies, private healthcare or gambling, Green Party councillors only have two vested interests and Those vested interests. We want to protect the communities we seek to serve and we want to protect the environment." NR (04:21.6), "Well, let's come to that, then, because most interesting, perhaps, is to look at what Greens say who are running for office. You are not. You are a member of the London assembly, you're not a Member of Parliament, you're not running in these elections. Now, you live in Hackney. Hackney happens in northeast London to be a top Green target for taking control from the Labour Party." NR (04:41.9), "So let's look at protecting communities. For example, on crime, the manifesto calls the Metropolitan Police institutionally racist, homophobic, sexist and misogynists. It goes on to say, greens cannot accept this system. It calls for safe spaces for, heroin users to shoot up, to end cautions for street prostitution and to end what the manifesto calls discriminatory policing of delivery riders." NR (05:08.8), "This is an agenda for an endless fight with the police, isn't it?" ZP (05:12.0), "I don't think so. Baroness Casey, in the last couple of years, did a review into Metropolitan Police and it was actually the findings that found it institutionally racist and misogynistic. Something that Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, to his credit, accepts. It is noticeable that Mark Rowley, the Commissioner of the Police, doesn't accept that, yet they continue, to work together in that way." ZP (05:31.1), "On the issue of drug harm, we have the highest drug deaths, of any country in Europe. And every single year for the past 13 years, drug deaths have increased. So I think the question anyone has, and we have in Hackney, is that the war on drugs has clearly failed. It's failed in cities right across this country, and more and more people are, often taking dangerous drugs." ZP (05:50.3), "So do we want people to buy them on the black market or on street corners? Or do we want people to go to a pharmacy or a medical health professional where, if they have an addiction to dangerous drugs, we can work with them to take a public health approach based in harm reduction." NR (06:02.7), "Public health approaches to. Is to legalise hard drugs and to legalise prostitution, you say to legalise and regulate and the regulators. It's still legalised, isn't it?" ZP (06:11.5), "No, the point is you can't just go into a shop and buy drugs, which is how it's presented in the press. Again, because I can keep talking about what councillors can do, rather than what" NR (06:18.3), "you would do if you were Prime Minister, because that's for another interview. Are you saying councillors should cut the police budget? Because that's what it seems to imply when you say, we cannot accept this system, let the council spend Money on crime reduction. Don't give that money to the police." ZP (06:33.7), "It's about reprioritizing. So it's." NR (06:35.5), "Does that mean cut in English?" ZP (06:36.7), "No. So let's look at example. We're straight back onto drugs. A lot of police time is spent on stop and search for cannabis use, for instance. It doesn't escape people's notice that that is often, in the politics of racism, if you're a young black person, I think it's something like you're 18 times more likely to be stopped and searched than your white peer, despite the fact there's no evidence that they're more likely to be dealing or using drugs." ZP (07:00.8), "And so I think it's important that we make sure the police time is spent properly, which I think is about community prevention, about cohesiveness and bringing communities together, particularly in, like, whether it means redirecting the budget." NR (07:11.4), "Does it mean the police budget?" ZP (07:12.9), "Well, it means redirecting within the police budget, so making sure that the time police are spent is spent on community safety." NR (07:18.2), "Well, it's interesting that we talked about police because, as you know, you've come under serious criticism for retweeting criticism of the action of the police officers who stopped the alleged attacker of Jews in Golda's Green. Now, you apologised for retweeting that." NR (07:34.1), "You said you should have a meeting with the head of the Met. You sent him a letter. I want to ask you a different question. You've not apologised for the content of that. Why did you empathise with the attacker, and not with police officers who feared for their own lives and were trying to protect other people's lives?" ZP (07:53.3), "I think there's two things in that that I, really clearly want to say. The first is my very first response to the attack was to be horrif, as everyone was, I'm sure. And the first thing I posted was solidarity to the victim, to the family and indeed, to people who are suffering right now, including as a Jewish man, where Jewish safety is not abstract." NR (08:12.0), "But then you posted that officers were repeatedly and violently kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was incapacitated by a Taser, caused extreme offence to those officers, to the head of the Met and to many people. I ask you again, why did you empathise, Empathise with the attacker, not with the police officer." ZP (08:28.9), "As I said, there's two things I wanted to say, so that was the first. The second, what I want to say is two things can be true at the same Time officers are incredibly brave when they run towards scenes of crimes that most people, including myself, would want to run away from. At the same time, I think it is accurate, and that I was also traumatised, by seeing, someone handcuffed and completely, repeatedly kicked in the head." ZP (08:51.7), "Now, sure, if you'll forgive me, it is an answer," NR (08:54.4), "but it's not an answer to the question. You posted something with the power that you have, with the number of people who follows us, and not empathising in that post with the Jewish community or critically with the police officers, you empathise with the attacker. Look what they're doing to the alleged attacker." ZP (09:11.1), "I don't think it was your choice. As I say, the first thing I did was show solidarity to the victims and I thank the officers. Second, though, I think the sign of a compassionate society is how we treat people, even people who have done horrific things, because actually, the way we do justice in this country is in court." NR (09:26.0), "You said a key value of the Greens was protecting communities. What are your proposals for protecting the Jewish community?" ZP (09:33.5), "The Jewish community is not safe right now. And as I said, as a Jewish man, this isn't abstract for me. In fact, in the last six weeks alone, two people have been arrested. So how would you protect anti Semitic attacks towards me? I think there's lots that needs to happen in this country. The first is community cohesion and community building. Some of the work that I'm proudest of in London, that I see Londoners do, is where I see the Jewish community working alongside the Muslim community." NR (09:55.1), "What would you do? What would Zach Polanski do in order to reduce attacks on the Jewish community?" ZP (09:59.9), "So, first of all, to invest in that work, that community, faith work, to make sure communities stand together. Second, to make sure that the Jewish community, give them the investment that they need. In fact, what the Prime Minister has been doing to make sure that happens. I do think a police response is the last response when everything before it has failed." NR (10:17.6), "I still think you're not really answering the question about what you would do. Let me ask you this." ZP (10:21.0), "I think I do." NR (10:21.6), "Would you deal with, for example, a candidate who says Jewish people fear hate because they know they should be hated. Another one who suggested that the attacks on the ambulances was a false flag and carried out, presumably by Israel. Another of your candidates who blamed Israel for the Bondi beach terrorist attack." NR (10:41.0), "A fourth candidate who said Donald Trump was, quote, owned by Jews. And most horrifying of all, although this individual has now been arrested, one of your candidates who Reposted something saying ramming a synagogue isn't anti Semitism, it's revenge." NR (10:56.8), "What are you, Zach Polanski doing to end these disgusting messages?" ZP (11:03.5), "Those messages are all unacceptable and it's important to condemn that. The Green Party are an anti racist party and it's important that we stick to our values." NR (11:11.0), "We can't just say the words were an anti racist bar to. And I've just read you out five of the most revolting comments at a time when, according to an independent advisor, we face a national emergency of anti Semitism. I'm asking you, you're not responsible for everything they say. Of course you're not." NR (11:26.3), "You can't be." ZP (11:27.3), "I am responsible, actually." NR (11:28.2), "What are you going to do about it?" ZP (11:29.0), "I am the leader of a party. I was about to finish my sentence." NR (11:31.5), "Forgive me. Go on." ZP (11:32.4), "We're an anti racist party. And so what I've already committed to doing is making sure that we have a standardised vetting process in future. And also make sure that we have compulsory training of all our candidates to make it clear that anti Semitism is completely unwelcome in the Green Party as it is in society. It is also important to say one case of anti Semitism is one too many." ZP (11:50.5), "This is a handful of cases and actually we have over 4,500 candidates, the vast, vast majority of which are doing amazing work in their communities right now, going out there to tackle the cost of living crisis, to make sure that we're funding public services and making sure that it's about people power and community, grassroots power." NR (12:05.1), "You can dismiss one or two as, just, unrepresentative. I've just read five. I could have read 20 cases of revolting anti Semitism posted by your candidates. Now you're a new leader, how are you going to avoid becoming the new Jeremy Corbyn of British politics?" ZP (12:21.5), "Well, I think me and Jeremy are very different people and there's much, you know, the question was almost inviting me to condemn Jeremy Corbyn. I think there was lots that Jeremy Corbyn was putting forward to this country that I think was really positive. We've talked about wealth taxes, about public ownership. I also think it's important, speaking, for myself right now, that we make sure that we have this vetting process, that it's really clear that anti Semitism, Islamophobia, any form of hatred or hate, crime is not welcome." NR (12:47.3), "Do you believe that Palestine is, to coin a phrase, on the ballot this Thursday?" ZP (12:52.3), "I think lots of things are on the ballot this Thursday." NR (12:54.6), "But is Palestine on the ballot? This." ZP (12:56.2), "I think it's one of the elements, as is the climate crisis. As is." NR (12:58.7), "What does it mean Palestine is on the ballot? Because. The reason I ask you is because your candidate for mayor of Lewisham says Palestine is on the ballot this Thursday. Haringey Green Party campaign launch video. You might think it'd be about bins, you might think it'd be about schools, hospitals, it might be about cleaning up the roads." NR (13:17.2), "It is a series of councillors saying, as a council, I will take all appropriate steps to, uphold the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. Do you think council elections really should be about Palestine?" ZP (13:29.8), "I think they can be about all of those things. And I think what people have seen in this country is a genocide for two and a half years that our government is still arming, are still sharing intelligence with. And I think lots of people feel very strongly both about their local services, as they should do, and feel equally strongly about the fact that there's a reprehensible genocide happening." ZP (13:48.5), "And they vote, but the way they vote in local elections" NR (13:52.6), "should be determined by their views of Israel and Palestine." ZP (13:56.0), "I wouldn't tell anyone how their vote should be determined, but I think it's an element for lots of people in how they vote." NR (14:00.1), "And do you think that will contribute to community cohesion? Do you?" ZP (14:02.7), "I think yes, because I think, we shouldn't pit Jewish safety against a genocide in Gaza. That's conflating anti Semitism and criticism of the Israeli government. That's something Benjamin Netanyahu does regularly. And as a Jewish person, that makes me feel less safe." NR (14:16.4), "Sure. But there are lots of Jewish people who would say to you they feel unsafe if they feel that their counsellors are motivated first and foremost by Palestine. And if somebody gives that speech, for example, about Palestine being on the ballot, they are likely to think that." NR (14:34.6), "We looked for, example at Barnett Greens, where one in seven residents identify as Jewish. And it includes in its manifesto the fact that, you're standing up for Palestine. Do you think that's going to help?" ZP (14:49.0), "Well, I walk regularly on Palestinian marches with hundreds and hundreds, in fact, thousands of people, many of whom are Jewish. And there have been rabbis who have spoken out on this too. I accept, though, there are Jewish people whose views are equally as valid who, don't agree with those views." ZP (15:04.0), "And I think the job of all of us who are in public life right now is to de. Escalate tensions. And look, how do we bring people together? And I accept that's a huge challenge. And I think one of the ways we could do that is by ending our complicity in the genocide." NR (15:15.4), "Let's turn finally to another issue. We'll talk at greater length when, we're talking about the possibility of you being Prime Minister, which you have said that you would like to do. One thing that is very high on the agenda now is the soaring cost of government borrowing. What would the Greens do to cut it?" ZP (15:30.6), "Well, I think we need to make sure that we're investing. So I think there's two ways of doing that. The first is, wealth taxes, which I know we've rehearsed before, but I'll just say that's for first place." NR (15:38.4), "How does that cut government borrowing?" ZP (15:40.2), "Because ultimately it means you need to borrow less if you're." NR (15:43.0), "If you're ultimately about cutting the cost of government borrowing." ZP (15:45.5), "Yes." NR (15:45.8), "Which is soaring. It's higher than it's been any time this century because people are nervous about high spending, high taxing governments that are politically unstable." ZP (15:54.7), "I think someone who speaks brilliantly on this, who I've spoken to, is the economist Mariana Matsicatu, and she talks about the fact that a government should have a mission that should be a very clear plan of how you tackle the climate crisis, how you reduce inequality. Now, if you have a clear plan and you're borrowing for that, you're taking the market with you because they can clearly see what the return on investment is and how you're bringing money back into the." ZP (16:15.2), "That's how you reduce borrowing levels. If we don't have a plan and continue to borrow, then it feels very, very scattered, and that's why things are getting worse. We need to make sure that there's a consistent plan in place that's set out carefully that can make sure we're putting money back into our communities and investing in those communities." NR (16:29.3), "Do you think you're ready to be Prime Minister?" ZP (16:31.1), "I'm not ready right now, no. I've been leader for eight months, and there's lots of skills and lots of knowledge to get, and I think that's fine. I think I'm a human being. I'm not perfect." NR (16:38.5), "But give it two years, you will be." ZP (16:40.0), "Well, we'll see in two years time, won't we? But I'll certainly be putting in the work." NR (16:43.2), "Zach Polanski, leader of the Green Party in England and Wales, thanks very much for coming into the." ZP (16:46.3), "Thank you, Nick."

Farrukh

165,871 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

This episode is about a once-in-a-generation mind working on what may be the most important problem in history. It's based on the new book The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence by Sebastian Mallaby. (0:00) This is the most crazy, ferocious corporate battle that we've ever seen. (2:21) Intelligence is fundamental; it is the root of all else. (3:27) When Demis founded DeepMind almost every investor turned him away. (4:50) Demis is a missionary entrepreneur and out-of-the-box scientist who, through brilliance and extraordinary drive, emerges as the right person for a particular moment. (6:20) I sit at my desk at 2 a.m., and I feel like reality is staring at me, screaming at me, literally screaming at me, trying to tell me something if I could just listen hard enough. That's how I feel every day, so you can see why I'm trying to build AI. I've felt that since I was very young that there's a deep, deep mystery about what's going on here. (7:10) Demis, who blazed the trail followed by rivals, is decent and public-spirited and wants the best for humanity. He has ego; he is fearsomely competitive, but his goal is scientific enlightenment, not money or power. (9:49) Demis has an extraordinary level of determination, unlike pretty much anybody. Astonishing, incredible determination. That's his most defining characteristic: just unbelievable determination. He works, sleeps, eats, breathes the mission 24 hours a day to a degree that I haven't seen with other people. (10:48) There is no 50% mode in Demis. There is not even a 99% mode in Demis. There is only 100%. (14:39) The slightly warped way I took that was: how do you know you've done your best? The only way I could know is basically if I push myself to the point just before death, because that is literally when you have done your best. (19:07) When he signed up for a game he liked to feel that he could win. (20:44) He saw no reason not to start a company and so he did. (22:40) Demis on what losing feels like to him: It's like my soul is on fire. (25:34) Demis was an extreme case of an authentic entrepreneur, not a mercenary who starts with a desire to get rich from a startup then casts around for a plausible idea, but rather a missionary who feels compelled to work on a particular challenge then starts a company as a way of tackling it. (25:57) The good thing about missionaries is that they never quit. Even if they have to work around the clock and pay themselves nothing. They will keep obsessing about the problem. (26:08) Peter Thiel on Demis: “I always say that people aren't really entrepreneurs in the abstract, but there's maybe one great company that somebody has in them. It was Demis's destiny to build this one.” (26:30) "If you invent a breakthrough in artificial intelligence so machines can learn, that would be worth 10 Microsofts." — Bill Gates (32:09) We only wanted hardcore believers. We would go to conferences and tell people we are starting an AGI company. 80% of the people would roll their eyes at us, literally roll their eyes at us and turn around and walk away. We figured that this was a very efficient way to discover who we should be talking to. (32:50) Blessed are those who believed before there was any evidence. (34:17) The way Demis saw things, true general intelligence would make almost anything possible, surpassing the internet, the printing press, or even the industrial revolution in importance. (35:22) Elon had declared that humans needed to colonize Mars in case disaster struck Earth. Demis had countered that killer AI robots might be one such disaster, but that the AI could obviously follow humans to Mars if it wanted to. (36:25) Peter Thiel felt instinctively suspicious of a fellow chess player. A man who had spent his formative years mentally crushing opponents should be treated with caution, Thiel reckoned. (37:07) I'm talking about the biggest invention ever, and investors keep coming back to "Where's the widget?" and I'm like, "I'm going to revolutionize all widgets, so I can pick you a random widget if you want me to, but you obviously haven't got the point if you're asking me this." (37:42) He [Larry Page] was basically telling me, maybe you could build a company like Google, but it would take the best part of your career. If my real mission was to build AGI, then why don't I use all the resources that he's accumulated? I thought that was a pretty good argument. (38:50) Elon tries to buy DeepMind (42:33) Sam Altman emails Elon: "I've been thinking a lot about whether it's possible to stop humanity from developing AI. I think the answer is almost definitely not. If it's going to happen anyway, it seems like it would be good for someone other than Google to do it first." (43:18) If you have powerful people who are able to understand the impact of the technology, they're not just gonna sit on the sidelines. (44:08) Humans had not understood how little they had understood. (44:31) As Peter Thiel said of Demis, "Geniuses are seldom brilliant in a general way. They tend to be brilliantly suited to a particular mission." (46:50) Demis was far more original and far more of a contrarian than most of the self-identified contrarians of Silicon Valley. (48:11) When Demis solves something big, he doesn't pause to spend much time savoring the achievement. (48:49) You definitely can't crack a hard problem if the person leading the team thinks it's not possible. (54:05) This is my whole life's work. I have to do what's necessary. The mission is in me; it's infused in me. You can't separate it from me. (54:28) Demis's core theme is that money and power were not ends in themselves. They were a means to scientific knowledge.

David Senra

255,708 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Alright, here's the epic towel rant from tonight; And so that's what kind of tipped me off in real time. I was like: wait a minute. Is Judge Doolin ruling from the bench right now? And then I was like: wait a minute. He's ruling from the bench and ordering them to appoint a new prosecutor and potentially the Attorney General. Oh my word. How—what is this? I—this wasn't on my bingo card. Even now I'm just like: Oh my God, I can't believe he did that. Judge Doolin—in a good way. I'm just like: Oh my God, there is hope. And then to follow it up with: "Oh yeah, I'm thinking about a hearing on the contempt." Oh my God—you're telegraphing. You're going to have a contempt hearing after the Attorney General is potentially on the case. The other witnesses, however, are left in this position where they have this kind of not really well-funded—like kind of spastic prosecution, like the special prosecutors on the Kearney cases. Then you got the December 23rd, 2023 criminal charges against Aidan that were charged in Dedham District Court, 23rd or 26th or so. And that was for illegally—allegedly—recording Lindsey Gaetani and then submitting an edited version of the recording into court for some reason. I don't know why Aidan did that, especially apparently when there's an original version of the recording pursuant to some of the statements in court. And then also for intimidating Lindsey—for allegedly going over there on December 23rd, 2023—against Karen Read's advice and against his lawyers' advice, apparently, according to a leaked group chat message from Facebook in 2024—in May of 2024—going over to Lindsey's apartment. And then according to the affidavit from the search warrant for Karen Read's cell phone—allegedly telling Lindsey that she shouldn't cooperate with the grand jury. She should—she could remove information from her phone or something—that Aidan would get her a lawyer, but only if she agreed to meet with a lawyer only with him present, because she had, quote, "broken his trust." It just like—wild stuff. And that new grand jury, by the way, was apparently—it did go forward. And then in time it came out that it—that was about Karen and Aidan and witness intimidation and conspiracy, because Aidan Kearney—between October and November—really August and November of 2023—it started telling Lindsey Gaetani about his communications with Karen Read that included—in writing—Exhibit O to Karen Read search warrant affidavit, which says that Karen Read told Aidan Kearney that in November of 2023—November 28, 2023, to be specific—that Karen Read told Aidan Kearney that Karen Read and her team at ex parte conversations with former U.S. Attorney Josh Levy—which was right in the window of time that Jessica Leslie, the grand juror leaker, was leaking information. Leslie started leaking in August of 2022—which is the same month that Alan Jackson joined Karen Read's legal team. And Josh Levy—who was one of the U.S. Attorneys in charge of that grand jury—Leslie was leaking about four different cases: probably the Birchmore case, definitely the Read and O'Keefe case, definitely the CDL case. One more case. We can't really—the group of us journalists involved in this—can't really figure out. So right in the middle of that—November of 2023—Josh Levy is leaking ex parte grand jury information to Karen Read, which she's putting—she's telling Aidan Kearney about; he's putting it in writing. He just was trying to just show off for Lindsey, but you don't like—come on—like what is it? First day in the IC, bro? I'm not in the IC. I'm not part of the government. I'm a towel. But anyway—so Aidan's bragging to Lindsey, and I don't think that was a very good idea. I mean, she's brilliant and stuff, but like—why would you ever say that to her? Don't say that stuff. But anyway—like, why would you say—even if it's your significant other—unless they are read-in on the intel that you are sharing—why would you ever, ever, ever share that with someone? It exposes them to an incredible liability—which, if you love them, don't do it. It also exposes your own credibility to an incredible risk of liability. You will never be trusted by the intelligence community again. Pillow talk and honeypots are how they trap operatives. If you chase sex, they will compromise you. How can you not understand that? So if you get compromised by someone who's not an agent—just someone who's your partner and you're just telling them stuff about protected federal investigations—what do you think your reputation is going to be like among the intelligence community when you're doing that and they haven't even honeypotted you? You just voluntarily started putting this shit in writing. They're going to look at you like you are out of your mind. So anyway—Karen Read apparently is telling Aidan Kearney that she's having ex parte conversations with Josh Levy. Now, the grand jury that Leslie was leaking from was impaneled in May of 2022 when Rachael Rollins used to be U.S. Attorney in Boston. Now think about this. In 2020, Rachael Rollins and Aidan Kearney—Rachael Rollins, a hyper-liberal known for her soft-on-crime stance. We'll also hear Rollins hated Michael Morrissey. Anyway, Rollins worked with Turtle Boy to send a Republican operative named Rayla Campbell to Joe Kennedy Jr.'s events in the Senate race against Ed Markey so that Ed Markey could win the Senate seat. Now, interestingly enough, Rachael Rollins then got appointed to the position of U.S. Attorney right after that. And you might say: well, Grant, that's a stretch. No, no—because then within a few months, Rachael Rollins—part of the reason she gets thrown out of office by the DOJ OIG—is because she attends an event in Andover with—guess who?—Dr. Jill Biden, the wife of the then-president who appointed her. Now, what does that mean? Well, if you really think about the geopolitical implications of the 2020 Senate race between Ed Markey in Massachusetts and Joe Kennedy Jr.—well, one of the things you're going to realize is that—think about 2020. The leadership around Biden did not know that the chaos of 2024 was going to happen with Kamala and Biden not really being up to it. You're thinking ahead to 2024. Why? Who's your biggest target if you are a sitting Democrat and you're worried about a primary challenge four years from now? Well, what if JFK's—what is it—nephew or whatever it is—is in the House of Representatives? And what if JFK started his career in the House of Representatives? And what if that new young Kennedy with red hair and sort of a photogenic face? What if he is running for JFK's old Senate seat? What if he's on the same exact trajectory as JFK? Oh, we can't have that. We—as the Biden White House—cannot have Joe Kennedy Jr. beating Ed Markey for Senate. And how it got to the point that somebody talked to Rachael Rollins and she came up with the brilliant idea to reach out to Turtle Boy so that Turtle Boy would talk to Rayla Campbell to send her to Joe Kennedy Jr.'s events to help Markey—I don't know. But that's why I think Rachael Rollins became U.S. Attorney—someone who, in my opinion, was uniquely unqualified and fundamentally unethically un-predisposed to being able to run that office. Who then in turn immediately tried to interfere in the 2022 Suffolk DA primary between Kevin Hayden and Ricardo O'Rourke—because Rollins wanted to see her progressive vision continue through O'Rourke—so she worked with Daniel Medwed—the same professor who was involved with advocating the media on behalf of Karen Read's team. She worked with Daniel Medwed to get a story leaked about how a non-existent federal probe into Kevin Hayden—to increase Ricardo O'Rourke's chances in the Suffolk DA primary. Sound familiar? Oh, hell yeah. So anyway—between November of 2022 and May of 2023—you got this weird situation where Rollins knows she's getting forced out; Levy's going to take over the office. The people who take Rollins out are Josh Levy, Bill Abley, and still head of the criminal division—Dustin Chao, I think—still head of the public integrity unit, and then executive officer who is also the press secretary or the communications director of the office. Those four people—without being named; they're named by title—were the people who cooperated with the DOJ to take Rollins out—DOJ-OIG to take Rollins out. Now, why is that interesting? Well, one—because it shows that people in that office knew that Rachael Rollins had a proclivity for weaponizing leaks about non-existent federal probes to interfere in particular district attorney races and matters. Second—Rachael Rollins and Michael Morrissey had a bifurcated history of ten years. One: Rachael Rollins had this list of 25 crimes she wouldn't prosecute, and other DAs critiqued her—not just Michael Morrissey but others. Rollins—I'm pretty sure—was the one who first called Morrissey a "meatball," in fact, because of his criticism of Rollins over that issue. Rachael Rollins—I think—has a proclivity, in my opinion, to hold a bit of a grudge. When she became U.S. Attorney and she realized she was on the way out—well, maybe the Sandra Birchmore probe started back in May of 2022 because former chief of the Canton police—Ken Berkowitz—went to the FBI and told them that the FBI covered up—the MSP unit detailed to the Norfolk DA covered up Sandra Birchmore's murder—potentially because Yuri Bukhenik and John Fanning used to work in Stoughton with Matt Farwell and Robert Devine and Billy Farwell—I think they all worked there. And furthermore—that Brian Tully, the unit commander, was partners with John Fanning for 20 years. All right, and in that regard—it is very interesting, I think—that Chief Berkowitz—who may have been very offended that his unit... So Sandra Birchmore was murdered on February 1st, 2021, at 9:23 p.m. in her apartment in Canton. Okay—on February 4th, Monday in the morning—the Canton police do a wellness check after they get a call from her—Sandra's—colleagues at the school where she worked as an administrative assistant. Now the Canton police respond—on Monday, February 4th—by Wednesday, February 6th. The Canton police have collected the following evidence in order. And if you don't believe me, you can read pages—I think 97 through 101—of the Canton Police Department audit report released in April of 2025. Point by point. Number one: the Canton police confirm—via a witness who was the maintenance worker at Sandra's apartment building—that Matt Farwell was the man on camera outside Sandra's apartment in the elevator at 9:23 p.m. on February 1st—which is exactly when Sandra died. Two: that the man was Matt Farwell, and he was the same man who helped Sandra move into her apartment. Three: that when the Canton PD went to Sandra's school, they got information that Farwell was telling people that Sandra was pregnant with his child—that he had abused her since she was a child—and that he was going to quote "take care of the problem himself" if Sandra decided to carry the baby to term. All right. All of that information—by February 6th of 2021—was passed over to the MSP. John Fanning and this whole unit—I think—really then facilitate a report sometime over the next six to 12 months that exonerates Farwell and says Sandra dies from self-harm. Well, I think that's why Ken Berkowitz blew the whistle before he died of cancer—and that's why there was a grand jury impaneled in May of 2022—and it was really about the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder. Well—one—it was about Sandra Birchmore's murder. Why does that make everything so interesting? Because I think that the investigation wasn't just about who killed Sandra and why—but how was it ruled a—the result of self-harm—instead of the very obvious murder that it was. Well—that starts—2022, I think—May of 2022—the grand jury. Jessica Leslie was on the grand jury—leaker—who's going to be sentenced on October 4th of 2025. I think Jessica Leslie—ladies and gentlemen—in August of 2022 somehow leaked to Karen Read—Alan Jackson—that the Norfolk DA was dirty because they covered up—and that MSP unit—because they covered up Sandra Birchmore's murder. All right—so therefore, Alan Jackson—that's the skeleton in the closet. It wasn't what the people in the house were doing. I'm still a little suspect of who they know—but I don't think that's the big deal. I don't think Jen McCabe's social life is the big deal. Nobody cares—nobody fucking cares. Sorry for cussing. The big issue is that Jen was friends with Tully. Tully's unit knew literally where the bodies were buried. And they—I think—they brought on the PI—Marty Kraft—and Kate Peter—to insulate their exposure from the coming publicity that they knew was going to be brought upon them by Alan Jackson. And so they were worried. And who would you bring in if you had covered up a murder? If you were a MSP unit—you'd bring in someone like Kate Peter. Because you can read her in on that. She's hardened. She doesn't give a fuck. She lost two of her kids—and I don't think she even fucking cared. So who the fuck's the perfect person be like: "Bruh, if that shit gets national attention, we're fucked. So you better control that fucking narrative and handle all these like different people that get too close to this—or we're going to be exposed for Birchmore." But let me bring it back to the point here—which is in 2022, the feds clearly were starting to poke around. And come 2023—I think Brian Tully's unit was desperate. Who was going to find out because of the coverage of the Read case? Could they make sure that Kate Peter got close enough to Netflix and Gretchen Voss so that they couldn't find out what was actually going on? And could the Birchmore cover-up be kept up—even in light of the national spotlight? When you think about the fact that some people may not have been loyal to the Justice for John O'Keefe movement—but were instead primarily loyal to Brian Tully's unit. And when you think about the fact that maybe Tully's unit didn't run the best investigation of Karen Read—maybe there were some flaws. But if you think about the fact that they did get her—but if you think about it in the context of: Karen knew from the jump that the MSP were dirty over Birchmore—then you understand: Karen—that's why it was going to become an incident. Everyone knew—everyone around Tully, his friends, all of them—the unit—they knew they covered up Birchmore's murder. And they knew Karen had it in her hands if she could just figure out the PR. And that's exactly what she did—to put enough pressure on them. They took her to trial anyway—and it destroyed the fucking Norfolk DA—destroyed Brian Tully's unit. It cost them dearly—and she's a tactical fucking genius. I think Brian Tully thought he was slicker than he was by using the prosecution of Aidan Kearney—not to get a genuinely—in my opinion—bad guy who was deserving of the indictment handed up by a grand jury of his peers. But because Tully wanted to know what the real target of the federal probe is. If you don't know what a backhand is, folks—a backhand is where you investigate one thing on the surface because you're dealing with a very high-level operation like the state police—who are a paramilitary intelligence-gathering operation. So you trick them. You make them think they're under investigation for John's death and the investigation of that death. But really—you're investigating them for the cover-up of Sandra Birchmore's murder. And that's exactly what I think happened to this unit. That's what I think Brian Tully was trying to figure out—from August of 2023 until about December. I think they eventually put it together—and by August of 2024, Matthew Farwell got indicted. Now—it's a question of all this as a result of today. I want to be very clear: this is what was called for. There needed to be an independent voice with power and who takes no nonsense—who came into this and said: Nope—it's out of your hands. And that's what Judge Doolin did today. Someone just needed to not either be involved with Karen Read, Aidan Kearney, or the Norfolk DA—or Kate Peter or Marty Kraft—and prosecute this. Now, all those other witnesses—I have no idea what the hell is going to happen there. But at least for Lindsey—Judge Doolin was like: enough of this nonsense. And that's why today was such a big deal in light of that historical context—because just tracing that very insidious pattern of events over the past 18 months—you can see this became a proxy war. It was Michael Morrissey on one side with his marching soldiers: Brian Tully, Kate Peter, Marty Kraft. And then it was Karen Read and the DOJ on the other side. Okay. And their soldiers were like the Free Karen Read movement and Turtle Boy and Natalie and all these other people. This was an intelligence community proxy war. And that's why I've been trying to tell people for so long: Lindsey Gaetani was not involved. She was an unwitting pawn. These two factions both took advantage of her—including Brian Tully—who was more interested in preserving his unit's reputation than actually defending the interest of the vulnerable. In my opinion, I think Brian Tully is a terrible person. Does that mean that he's a bad person for trying to hold Karen Read accountable for John O'Keefe's death? No, of course not. He's a bad person because in what fucking world do you—as a fucking state police officer—who you—you are entrusted—not just to get the bad guys—but to protect the most fucking vulnerable? One: how do you justify what happened with Sandra Birchmore? Two: how the fuck do you get it in your fucking mind that you're going to take a 15-year unredacted extraction of a fucking vulnerable victim's cell phone and release it to a fucking defendant known for promulgating exactly that material? What fucking headspace? What satanic fucking chamber do you and Kate Peter have to be drinking blood from fucking cups in to think that that's fucking okay? Fuck you. How do you even get in the headspace where doing something like that to a fucking victim becomes acceptable. The rot in that unit—whether enabled by Morrissey or whether he didn't know about it—I don't fucking know. But the point is: the rot in that unit was so deep that they lost their fucking souls. They didn't think of victims as victims. They re-victimized victims because it was a political fucking war—and these people are so hardened, I guess, that they don't understand what it means to be vulnerable. And these were police officers—detectives—people entrusted to uphold and protect the dignity of the most vulnerable—and they fucking used victims to advance some political agenda—to deal with the fact that they covered up a fucking murder. I'm done being gentle about this. Fuck these people. And I'm not saying that it was wrong for them to investigate Karen Read. I am pleased someone tried to prosecute her. I'm pissed at them because they were thinking about it from the perspective of their own liability for an unrelated case—and they fucked everything up—and introducing Kate Peter to this shit. Oh my God. It's a disgrace. It's a disgrace to the people who were hurt. It's a disgrace to the vulnerable. I frankly do not understand how Jen McCabe, Brian Tully, and Kate Peter go to bed each night. I don't get it. I don't know. Maybe there's something that shuts off the GABA-1 receptor or something and just makes you go to bed. I don't know. Never heard of such a thing. But I'm just saying: I don't know how you do it. How do you do it? But anyway—Judge Doolin—without giving a... extemporaneous, uh, bloviating cuss-based rant like I just did—instead, in my opinion, is like: fuck all of you! You're not being involved in this prosecution anymore. Someone's gonna protect this fucking woman—Lindsey Gaetani. I'm making you appoint someone! I love that man. Good for Judge Doolin. But still—we never should have gone to this point. This is incredible. With the... the... the MSP. The fact that they had a unit operating like this for so long. This is worse than what John Connolly and Whitey Bulger did. This is institutional rot that is so pervasive that it requires fundamental reform of the MSP. They're not incapable of—um, uh—solving crimes. I'm sure most of the MSP are wonderful. Anyway—my point is: I don't think the state police officers that I generally run into—or troopers—are bad people. I think most of them are wonderful. They've never been really mean to me. They do good work. They're out there protecting our roads. They stop people from speeding. They—what else do they do? They go after commercial truck violations. They investigate homicides—like, on the whole. And this is why I think we have to be careful about how we talk about this. I am not saying that the entire MSP is just rotten. I'm saying that when you have factions or sections within the institution that understand its machinations and are able to thus manipulate the bureaucratic structure and avoid accountability—you lose the confidence of everyone. And how do you think some of those good troopers feel when they have to go out there? Yes—people like me are going to smile at them and bless them and whatever—because I know they're not part of the problem. But most people look at them and they think that they're fucking hated. They don't deserve that. They literally put their lives on the line for us every day. And if we're going to give them the respect they deserve—if we're going to make the profession have the respect that it deserves—then this kind of institutional rot can't be looked at as just an embarrassment. And it can't be looked at as something that—oh, we just wish didn't happen. Maybe some guys are going to go away. No—you point at it. You scream it from the rooftops and you say: if this happens even once—then we have so failed as an institution; we must fundamentally reform from the ground up. And this wasn't just once. It was Birchmore. It was the phone extraction. It was the SA report leak over and over and over and over again. They knew the law. They were an old boys' club. They abused it. They had cover—and it was systemically enabled. And that's why I think—to save the profession of policing in Massachusetts—there needs to be a full-on unbridled discussion about how this happened—how the personalities involved were able to do what they did. And we can't be so tribalistic that because someone we support as to their views on one case, right? We cannot be so tribalistic that we just block out everything bad that they do. Or this rot will continue. And it is pernicious. It is insidious. It is invidious. It undermines the faith that citizens completely removed from this situation have in our system of government. It undermines victims' confidence in the ability to seek redress in the face of serious fucking harm—because they think the system doesn't actually care about them. It's just using them to get someone bigger. We cannot allow this to perpetuate. And the only way to fix it is to hold up situations like what happened to Birchmore—Sandra Birchmore—and what happened to Lindsey Gaetani—hold them up in the national spotlight—and say: we—the MSP—have failed you. Brian Tully failed these people. John Fanning failed these people. Nick Guarino failed these people. Yuri Bukhenik failed these people. We need to say that. We need to highlight it. We need to say: this happened even once. Therefore, we are not good enough. Not only are we not good enough—the very fact that either of these things were able to happen—the Birchmore cover-up, the phone extraction leak—is such a pervasive, systemic degradation of the faith that victims and the public have in the justice system—that our only option is to talk about this—congressional hearings. We need the State House to have congressional hearings. We need these people to answer for what they did. And we need to make sure it never happens again. And the only way you do that is by finding out what aspects of the bureaucratic structure allowed this to happen. And it's not going to be comfortable. I don't think it's going to be comfortable for anyone to talk about the fallout of any of this—but that's exactly what happened at the CCC on a smaller scale. And if this country matters—if this form of government matters—if this republic matters—then we will fix this. We will fix it together. We will address the hard questions. We will address the uncomfortable questions. We will shed our prejudices and polemical biases at the door. We will engage in no fear, no favoritism—and we will look only for the truth and nothing but it. And if you are incapable of doing that—you're contributing—either consciously or subconsciously—to the problem. It's our only option. And you can't just say: because they prosecuted Karen Read, we can't talk about anything bad that they did. That's tribalism. That's polemical. That's what drove us to this point.

Grant Smith Ellis

41,546 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce