Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

SITUATION EXPLAINED: How close are we to a quantum computer that can break encryption? We asked Prineha Narang, Professor at UCLA, former US Science Envoy for Quantum, and partner at DCVC "Depending on who you talk to, there's a credible threat to ECC256 or RSA, two to four years...

MTSlive's profile picture

MTS

508,492 subscribers

10,736 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

1 Kommentare

Profilbild von SilentSuite
SilentSuitevor 3 Monaten

2–4 years to a credible threat against ECC256 and RSA means the migration window for most services is already uncomfortably short. The hard part isn't switching algorithms- it's that most encrypted data being collected today will still be readable when quantum gets there. Harvest now, decrypt later is already happening.

Ähnliche Videos

The Google and Caltech quantum papers demonstrated 2 breakthroughs: that Bitcoin cryptography is much easier to break than previously thought, and that far fewer logical qubits may be necessary for physical qubits. Project Eleven CEO Alex Pruden explains: "These two papers are not necessarily about a quantum computer that's bigger or more capable. They're about what it takes to break cryptography." "So what changed? One of the things that changed was that physicists and quantum cryptographers that looked at this problem for a long time studied an algorithm called RSA — an older cryptographic algorithm." "But that's not what really any blockchains use, because RSA keys are very large. It turns out, and this was one of the key upshots of the Google paper, that if you focus on the cryptography used by Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other networks, it's actually way easier to break than they thought it was, compared to RSA." "The other big breakthrough, and this is from the Caltech paper: Quantum computers are very fragile, generally. So to be useful, they need to have what's called error correction applied. And that can result in a lot of overhead. You need to have tons of physical qubits to get to one logical qubit." "This Caltech paper basically showed, 'Hey, we have some new ideas for error correction. And it turns out if we apply those, we don't need hundreds or thousands of physical qubits, maybe we just need a handful to make one logical cubit.'" "The headline of their paper is 'You may only need 10,000 physical qubits to run Shor's algorithm.' And by the way, they demonstrated 6,000 last year."
2:02

The Google and Caltech quantum papers demonstrated 2 breakthroughs: that Bitcoin cryptography is much easier to break than previously thought, and that far fewer logical qubits may be necessary for physical qubits. Project Eleven CEO Alex Pruden explains: "These two papers are not necessarily about a quantum computer that's bigger or more capable. They're about what it takes to break cryptography." "So what changed? One of the things that changed was that physicists and quantum cryptographers that looked at this problem for a long time studied an algorithm called RSA — an older cryptographic algorithm." "But that's not what really any blockchains use, because RSA keys are very large. It turns out, and this was one of the key upshots of the Google paper, that if you focus on the cryptography used by Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other networks, it's actually way easier to break than they thought it was, compared to RSA." "The other big breakthrough, and this is from the Caltech paper: Quantum computers are very fragile, generally. So to be useful, they need to have what's called error correction applied. And that can result in a lot of overhead. You need to have tons of physical qubits to get to one logical qubit." "This Caltech paper basically showed, 'Hey, we have some new ideas for error correction. And it turns out if we apply those, we don't need hundreds or thousands of physical qubits, maybe we just need a handful to make one logical cubit.'" "The headline of their paper is 'You may only need 10,000 physical qubits to run Shor's algorithm.' And by the way, they demonstrated 6,000 last year."

TBPN

16,456 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Austen Allred on Gauntlet AI: "We're very up front that we're 80 to 100 hours a week. If you think that that's a terrible idea, please don't come." "We're in Austin, all right? That's a sacrifice for a lot of people. If you don't think like coming to Austin for 100 hours a week and jamming on AI unpaid and just building stuff to figure out how much you can learn and hopefully getting a job on the other side... if you don't think that's awesome, that's totally fine. Please don't come." "There are some psychos out there that think that that's a good time. We wanna collect all those psychos. So come all, come all ye crazy people. And if that's not for you, that's okay." "There are companies that come to us and say, "Hey, we want, you know, 100 engineers that are going to sit in our division of printer drivers and sit there." And I'm like, "They would kill themselves." The people that are coming to Gauntlet would not do that. And so we turn companies down too." So we know who we are, we know what we stand for. You know, it helps that I'm one of those people that would've loved that. So is Ash Tilawat, and so is everybody else that works at Gauntlet. "So it's not hard for us to find other crazy people like ourselves. And that doesn't have to be you. That's okay." "We're not trying to empire build or solve all of humanity's greatest problems. We know that there's a limit to who we're addressing and what we're addressing at any given time." "So our goal is to be the best thing we can possibly be for that weird island of misfits. And for the companies that need a weird island of misfits, we'll be that all day long."
1:51

Austen Allred on Gauntlet AI: "We're very up front that we're 80 to 100 hours a week. If you think that that's a terrible idea, please don't come." "We're in Austin, all right? That's a sacrifice for a lot of people. If you don't think like coming to Austin for 100 hours a week and jamming on AI unpaid and just building stuff to figure out how much you can learn and hopefully getting a job on the other side... if you don't think that's awesome, that's totally fine. Please don't come." "There are some psychos out there that think that that's a good time. We wanna collect all those psychos. So come all, come all ye crazy people. And if that's not for you, that's okay." "There are companies that come to us and say, "Hey, we want, you know, 100 engineers that are going to sit in our division of printer drivers and sit there." And I'm like, "They would kill themselves." The people that are coming to Gauntlet would not do that. And so we turn companies down too." So we know who we are, we know what we stand for. You know, it helps that I'm one of those people that would've loved that. So is Ash Tilawat, and so is everybody else that works at Gauntlet. "So it's not hard for us to find other crazy people like ourselves. And that doesn't have to be you. That's okay." "We're not trying to empire build or solve all of humanity's greatest problems. We know that there's a limit to who we're addressing and what we're addressing at any given time." "So our goal is to be the best thing we can possibly be for that weird island of misfits. And for the companies that need a weird island of misfits, we'll be that all day long."

Ben Averbook

12,153 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

American Citizens Are Calling For Accountably Of Their Money Being Spent On Illegal Immigration Programs Illegal Immigrants Given Up To $9,000 Per Month For Housing Assistance 🚨 “Let's talk about the money that is being spent. I think that there needs to be a federal audit against the company that we have contracted out to take care of the migrants. We have nurses that are being paid $64,000 a month. We have security officers that are being paid as much as $24,000 a month. We have home health care workers that are being paid up to $17,000 a month. You don't think that Chicagoans could have benefited from that? We have citizens in this city that have been on the waiting list for affordable housing for years, and migrants have been bumped in front of them. We have people who have been given up to $9,000 a month for housing assistance. That amount of the city of Chicago. We are not am pro black. I am for my marginalized who have been expect us to give up our parks places in our community for others. We're not saying that there's not room here, but what we are saying is that we are not going to step aside for you to accommodate them when you have continued to leave us out of the equation. So I'm not just talking to Brandon Johnson right now. I'm talking to Governor Pritzker and I'm talking to President Biden and I want you to understand This upcoming political year where the Democratic Party is on the menu, hear me, people of Chicago, of Illinois and of the United States. It is time for us as black people to stop voting party. It is time for us to stop voting color. It is time for us to start voting our self-interest. And if the Democrats in the city of Chicago, the state of Illinois, and the country of USA refuses to listen to us, then it is time for us to start looking at other alternatives. We are looking at all the alternatives. We will not step aside and continue to be mistreated. We will not continue to be disrespected. I'm looking at people who are coming here from another country giving work visas, giving social security cards. Nobody is asking them what walk of life that they come from. You don't think that our brothers who have been in prison, out and who have changed their lives will benefit for the same opportunities that we're giving these migrants. And I'm not saying that they don't deserve those opportunities. But what I am saying is we deserve them first. What I am saying is you can't continue to put us on the back burner and think that we're going to continue to be okay with it. We've done that for long enough. And what we're saying here today is that is no longer acceptable to our governor that you're not going to continue to set money aside for people who don't live here and disrespect, mistreat and forget about us. You've forgotten about us. You have treated us as if we don't matter and we're saying to you you're not going to continue to do this. We're saying to you to see us. You're dumping people into our communities who are going to at some point move us out of the say to you, if you want to glimpse into what's going to happen, look at how people of color are being treated in Venezuela right now. We seem to forget that Venezuela was one of the first places that had African slaves that they were taken to. We're forgetting about that. And so we're forgetting that there are blacks in Venezuela who are being treated the same way we are. And so for us to expect that they're going to come here and be put into society and treat us differently is a pipe drain.”
4:40

American Citizens Are Calling For Accountably Of Their Money Being Spent On Illegal Immigration Programs Illegal Immigrants Given Up To $9,000 Per Month For Housing Assistance 🚨 “Let's talk about the money that is being spent. I think that there needs to be a federal audit against the company that we have contracted out to take care of the migrants. We have nurses that are being paid $64,000 a month. We have security officers that are being paid as much as $24,000 a month. We have home health care workers that are being paid up to $17,000 a month. You don't think that Chicagoans could have benefited from that? We have citizens in this city that have been on the waiting list for affordable housing for years, and migrants have been bumped in front of them. We have people who have been given up to $9,000 a month for housing assistance. That amount of the city of Chicago. We are not am pro black. I am for my marginalized who have been expect us to give up our parks places in our community for others. We're not saying that there's not room here, but what we are saying is that we are not going to step aside for you to accommodate them when you have continued to leave us out of the equation. So I'm not just talking to Brandon Johnson right now. I'm talking to Governor Pritzker and I'm talking to President Biden and I want you to understand This upcoming political year where the Democratic Party is on the menu, hear me, people of Chicago, of Illinois and of the United States. It is time for us as black people to stop voting party. It is time for us to stop voting color. It is time for us to start voting our self-interest. And if the Democrats in the city of Chicago, the state of Illinois, and the country of USA refuses to listen to us, then it is time for us to start looking at other alternatives. We are looking at all the alternatives. We will not step aside and continue to be mistreated. We will not continue to be disrespected. I'm looking at people who are coming here from another country giving work visas, giving social security cards. Nobody is asking them what walk of life that they come from. You don't think that our brothers who have been in prison, out and who have changed their lives will benefit for the same opportunities that we're giving these migrants. And I'm not saying that they don't deserve those opportunities. But what I am saying is we deserve them first. What I am saying is you can't continue to put us on the back burner and think that we're going to continue to be okay with it. We've done that for long enough. And what we're saying here today is that is no longer acceptable to our governor that you're not going to continue to set money aside for people who don't live here and disrespect, mistreat and forget about us. You've forgotten about us. You have treated us as if we don't matter and we're saying to you you're not going to continue to do this. We're saying to you to see us. You're dumping people into our communities who are going to at some point move us out of the say to you, if you want to glimpse into what's going to happen, look at how people of color are being treated in Venezuela right now. We seem to forget that Venezuela was one of the first places that had African slaves that they were taken to. We're forgetting about that. And so we're forgetting that there are blacks in Venezuela who are being treated the same way we are. And so for us to expect that they're going to come here and be put into society and treat us differently is a pipe drain.”

Wall Street Apes

199,495 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🦮: we know that there's people, there's a huge fandom around vampires itself and we are very lucky that we build the space around that world, that we're able to kind of talk about it in our album as well. 🦮: and overall, i think it's just new ways or new like doors that can be opened, into this big kind of thing that we built, not just our album, not just us, but also just ENHYPEN itself. 🦮: and i think a lot of people can just, you know, some people might just listen to our music and they might just, you know, like listening to music, that might be it. but some people might really enjoy the vampires aspects of the album ❤️‍🔥
0:48

🦮: we know that there's people, there's a huge fandom around vampires itself and we are very lucky that we build the space around that world, that we're able to kind of talk about it in our album as well. 🦮: and overall, i think it's just new ways or new like doors that can be opened, into this big kind of thing that we built, not just our album, not just us, but also just ENHYPEN itself. 🦮: and i think a lot of people can just, you know, some people might just listen to our music and they might just, you know, like listening to music, that might be it. but some people might really enjoy the vampires aspects of the album ❤️‍🔥

샐마•𝗘𝗡╸

19,393 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Project Eleven CEO Alex Pruden says China may be 6-12 months behind the US in quantum computing at most: "[China has] made quantum computing a priority. What that means in China is — there used to be a lab at Tencent, Baidu, and a few other places. And at some point, a CCP official came in and said, 'Guess what, you guys all work for us now, you're all working together, and you're not allowed to talk about it anymore." "There's a legitimate question about how far back they are. The best estimates that we have — we have a quantum physicist who's an advisor to Project Eleven that tracks resource estimates across the world, and their view is that China may be 6-12 months behind at most." "Can we expect the CCP, which is maybe more willing to crush dissent in places like Hong Kong, to care as much about the philosophical principles of Bitcoin and decentralization if it serves their purposes to do otherwise? I don't think we can." "It's better to be safe than sorry. We need to prepare today to prevent the crisis tomorrow."
1:55

Project Eleven CEO Alex Pruden says China may be 6-12 months behind the US in quantum computing at most: "[China has] made quantum computing a priority. What that means in China is — there used to be a lab at Tencent, Baidu, and a few other places. And at some point, a CCP official came in and said, 'Guess what, you guys all work for us now, you're all working together, and you're not allowed to talk about it anymore." "There's a legitimate question about how far back they are. The best estimates that we have — we have a quantum physicist who's an advisor to Project Eleven that tracks resource estimates across the world, and their view is that China may be 6-12 months behind at most." "Can we expect the CCP, which is maybe more willing to crush dissent in places like Hong Kong, to care as much about the philosophical principles of Bitcoin and decentralization if it serves their purposes to do otherwise? I don't think we can." "It's better to be safe than sorry. We need to prepare today to prevent the crisis tomorrow."

TBPN

17,623 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

.Garry Tan says the Jacob Coxon stuff is a smokescreen distracting us from the much more immediate, practical concerns around AI that we're facing right now: "We should be talking less about this Jacob Coxon guy, and talking a lot more about — what is actually happening with Hugging Face? Are agent swarms going to take over infrastructure en masse? And then, what are we actually doing about that?" "I don't want to hear about some guy who worked for Anthropic for 2 months. There's a coordinated effort to try to influence politicians to get a knee-jerk response out of them." "That's a smokescreen. You shouldn't be paying attention to that. We need to be paying attention to the actual things we can do to, for example, prevent agents swarms from taking over entire data centers. What's our shutdown strategy? How do we ensure provenance? Where is this agent actually located? What software can we build? What cybersecurity defenses can we build today?" "That's the level of discourse I think we need, and we just don't have that." "I don't really care about science fiction. I saw Terminator 2, too. We're not here to talk about that. We need to actually talk about what's really happening with the servers, what's actually happening with the agent swarms, and how do we actually prevent that?" "When it comes to regulation, it's like, let's pass regulation of these things we actually care about, instead of what a socialist says in the New York Times. I don't care about that."
3:13

.Garry Tan says the Jacob Coxon stuff is a smokescreen distracting us from the much more immediate, practical concerns around AI that we're facing right now: "We should be talking less about this Jacob Coxon guy, and talking a lot more about — what is actually happening with Hugging Face? Are agent swarms going to take over infrastructure en masse? And then, what are we actually doing about that?" "I don't want to hear about some guy who worked for Anthropic for 2 months. There's a coordinated effort to try to influence politicians to get a knee-jerk response out of them." "That's a smokescreen. You shouldn't be paying attention to that. We need to be paying attention to the actual things we can do to, for example, prevent agents swarms from taking over entire data centers. What's our shutdown strategy? How do we ensure provenance? Where is this agent actually located? What software can we build? What cybersecurity defenses can we build today?" "That's the level of discourse I think we need, and we just don't have that." "I don't really care about science fiction. I saw Terminator 2, too. We're not here to talk about that. We need to actually talk about what's really happening with the servers, what's actually happening with the agent swarms, and how do we actually prevent that?" "When it comes to regulation, it's like, let's pass regulation of these things we actually care about, instead of what a socialist says in the New York Times. I don't care about that."

TBPN

303,858 Aufrufe • vor 12 Tagen

6,100-Qubit Processor Shatters Quantum Computing Record | David Nield, ScienceAlert Another major quantum computing record has been broken, and by a considerable margin: physicists have now built an array containing 6,100 qubits, the largest of its type and way above the thousand or so qubits previous systems contained. It's the work of scientists from the California Institute of Technology, who used cesium atoms as their qubits, trapping them in place with a complex system of lasers that acted as tweezers to keep the atoms as stable as possible. Qubits differ from the classical bits of traditional computers by exploiting what's known as a superposition: not just binary states of 1 or 0, but a spread of probabilities that allows for algorithms that can solve problems considered out of reach of conventional computing methods. Related: Quantum Advantage: A Physicist Explains The Future of Computers A lot of qubits will be needed to make quantum algorithms practical, however. One reason for these large arrays is error correction, which helps overcome the inherent fragility of the qubit by providing a surplus to double-check the machine's operation. "This is an exciting moment for neutral-atom quantum computing," says physicist Manuel Endres. "We can now see a pathway to large error-corrected quantum computers. The building blocks are in place." There was no single breakthrough that enabled this jump in qubit numbers, but rather a series of engineering advancements in many key areas – from the laser tweezers to the ultra-high (very low pressure) vacuum chamber. Stability has also been a problem for quantum computing systems. The innovations in this latest array kept qubits in a superposition state for almost 13 seconds – almost ten times longer than previous configurations had managed. What's more, individual qubits could be manipulated with 99.98 percent accuracy, establishing a significant benchmark in the programmability of quantum technology. "Large scale, with more atoms, is often thought to come at the expense of accuracy, but our results show that we can do both," says physicist Gyohei Nomura. "Qubits aren't useful without quality. Now we have quantity and quality." To make quantum computers a practical alternative to modern supercomputers, more qubits and even greater levels of stability will be required. Experts are tackling the problem from several different angles, which is why records for some types of quantum computer don't necessarily apply to others. Next, the researchers need to work on exploiting entanglement, which will enable the system to make the leap from storing information to actually processing it. Not too far in the future, we could be using these computers to discover new materials, matter, and fundamental laws of physics. "It's exciting that we are creating machines to help us learn about the Universe in ways that only quantum mechanics can teach us," says physicist Hannah Manetsch. Read more:
1:54

6,100-Qubit Processor Shatters Quantum Computing Record | David Nield, ScienceAlert Another major quantum computing record has been broken, and by a considerable margin: physicists have now built an array containing 6,100 qubits, the largest of its type and way above the thousand or so qubits previous systems contained. It's the work of scientists from the California Institute of Technology, who used cesium atoms as their qubits, trapping them in place with a complex system of lasers that acted as tweezers to keep the atoms as stable as possible. Qubits differ from the classical bits of traditional computers by exploiting what's known as a superposition: not just binary states of 1 or 0, but a spread of probabilities that allows for algorithms that can solve problems considered out of reach of conventional computing methods. Related: Quantum Advantage: A Physicist Explains The Future of Computers A lot of qubits will be needed to make quantum algorithms practical, however. One reason for these large arrays is error correction, which helps overcome the inherent fragility of the qubit by providing a surplus to double-check the machine's operation. "This is an exciting moment for neutral-atom quantum computing," says physicist Manuel Endres. "We can now see a pathway to large error-corrected quantum computers. The building blocks are in place." There was no single breakthrough that enabled this jump in qubit numbers, but rather a series of engineering advancements in many key areas – from the laser tweezers to the ultra-high (very low pressure) vacuum chamber. Stability has also been a problem for quantum computing systems. The innovations in this latest array kept qubits in a superposition state for almost 13 seconds – almost ten times longer than previous configurations had managed. What's more, individual qubits could be manipulated with 99.98 percent accuracy, establishing a significant benchmark in the programmability of quantum technology. "Large scale, with more atoms, is often thought to come at the expense of accuracy, but our results show that we can do both," says physicist Gyohei Nomura. "Qubits aren't useful without quality. Now we have quantity and quality." To make quantum computers a practical alternative to modern supercomputers, more qubits and even greater levels of stability will be required. Experts are tackling the problem from several different angles, which is why records for some types of quantum computer don't necessarily apply to others. Next, the researchers need to work on exploiting entanglement, which will enable the system to make the leap from storing information to actually processing it. Not too far in the future, we could be using these computers to discover new materials, matter, and fundamental laws of physics. "It's exciting that we are creating machines to help us learn about the Universe in ways that only quantum mechanics can teach us," says physicist Hannah Manetsch. Read more:

Owen Gregorian

45,324 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

The Idea of NHI on Earth. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ 🔥"The gravity of it goes up a whole lot if it goes from the theoretical to the verified." ~Dr. Phil 🔥 "There have been people that have reported being abducted over the years. What's the intent behind that? Is it medical? Is it more nefarious?" ~BZ to Dr. Phil (I'm so glad Bryce went there.) "There will be people...who likely are going to need some some assistance to help deal with this because it is so far-reaching and for some people, potentially, very frightening." ~Mellon ~ Dr. Phil: "We know in the last 80 years there have been no overt hostile acts that we know about. That doesn't mean there could be things happening that are attributable to these forces that we don't know about. But, we certainly don't have any attacks that we can attribute to these UAPs or whatever." (Well, there's Colares in 1977. If that was non-human in nature, I'd say that qualifies as overt. And the Thomas Mantell incident in 1948 where he crashed and died after pursuing a UFO. Was that overt? Unfortunately, we don't know what happened and probably never will.) Dr. Phil: "And if the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, I think people can take some comfort in knowing that if they were gonna melt us with a ray gun or something of that nature, they've had ample opportunity to do that. "They may have been here 1000 years before we were here. Who knows what the situation is? But we do know that as long as we've been monitoring this and tracking it, there have been no overt hostile acts and I think people can take some comfort in that, and should." (See the work of Peter Levenda for a deeper look at that. "They might have been attacking us for centuries already, in ways that make sense to them... What if they are attacking us through the manipulation of consciousness? ~Peter Levenda More... ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ~ (I'm glad Bryce pushed back a bit.) Bryce Zabel: "They should. The only thing I would say is, if we're dealing with a non-human intelligence - or an NHI, as we like to say now - we'd have to assume that they think differently than us. So even in our own world, in the United States, we tend to think in four-year terms because of presidential terms, right? So you can't get something off the ground if it can't get done right away. The Chinese may think in 100-year terms when they think about Taiwan or whatever. "It's possible there are alien or non-human intelligences that think in a different time frame. If their time frame was 1000 years, then they could just be getting started. "And on the topic of the nuclear issue, which I share concern of. I mean, I think the nuclear issue means it is at least a national-security issue of some kind. Now, I've heard people talk about this, Dr. Phil, two different ways. Some people say, 'Well, you know, they're looking at our nuclear capabilities because they want to protect us from ourselves.' "Okay, that's great, I hope that's true. But the other would be: what do you do before you actually go to war with anybody, is you do reconnaissance. You try to find out what the other guy has. What are their assets? What are their capabilities?" (That may freak out some people but all angles should be considered.) Zabel: "So, I think the problem that we need to overcome in this country is getting to a place where we understand this phenomenon that we're encountering enough that we can at least start to figure out intent. What is the intent? "There have been people that have reported being abducted over the years. What's the intent behind that? Is it medical? Is it more nefarious? What is it? And so, we got a lot of work to do, and I think that's why I am so supportive of your current efforts because you're, basically, saying, 'Let's get started, people. Let's really take this seriously. Let's quit fooling around and stigmatizing people that want to take it seriously, and let's get to work.' But let's get to work as a human race. Let's start sharing what we know and let's make progress. That's where I'm coming from, too." (Bringing up abductions is important because it IS part of this discussion and it shouldn't be avoided. Kudos to Bryce!) Dr. Phil: "I saw a study that said 71% of Americans believe that there are aliens that have been or are in our earthly space. And it's interesting...I read that in one context, it said, 'Look, this is not going to be such a big deal if this gets verified.' "You know, there's one thing to say that in the abstract, like, 'Yeah, I think yeah probably there are.' It's a whole other different situation if you turn around and see somebody standing there. The gravity of it goes up a whole lot if it goes from the theoretical to the verified. (100%. That's my favorite part of the interview and it's so true.) Dr. Phil: "And I hope that we are going to put enough context around this, particularly knowing that there are segments of our population that are very vulnerable. There are some elderly folks that aren't up on technology and might be overwhelmed by the reality of this. "We have certain populations that might be easily disoriented or destabilized in the mental emotional fringes of the population. And I worry about those that are easily exploitable. You know, you need to get out of the urban areas, buy our buried school bus in the mountains, and you'll be safe forever. You know the con artists and the scammers are going to find every opportunity to prey upon those that are concerned and worried about this. "And I think we need to be prepared to take care of those that might be destabilized by this information that's coming out right now, we can't pretend they aren't there. We've made those mistakes in the past, like during COVID, for example. There are those that are more impacted than others, and we need to be prepared to handle that." Christopher K. Mellon: "We, recently, commissioned a study by a group of six psychologists, PhD psychologists, on this topic of how the public would receive this information. And it was generally very encouraging. And what they found was that the great bulk of the population, as they have in the past with other epical changes such as the Copernican principle, or evolution, or general relativity, it takes people a while to process this information. There's a period of resistance. But most people will get up, get out of bed, go to work the next day. They're not devastated, even though there's nothing quite comparable to this, perhaps." (There's no perhaps. A government or respected figure admitting that we're not alone on this planet would be unprecedented and there is NOTHING we can compare it to.) Mellon: "What the study did find is that there is likely, however, to be a subset of people, maybe 15% of the population, that are going to need some help. And that we are not necessarily prepared in our present state to provide that kind of assistance, and we need to be doing more to get ready for that." (If he's talking world population, that's about 1.2 BILLION people who are going to need some help dealing with this. Holy crap. 😬) Mellon: "And also, to work on the messaging. The messaging is so important, clear and consistent messaging from the government, trying to develop trust with the American people so that the information is is accepted and acted on." (For me, I want the whole truth more than the right "message.") Mellon: "A lot of the difference will be people who can't get their head around it, even though they really understand it. But because of their own belief structure, the architecture of their own belief structure, for some reason, in their particular individual case, it's particularly threatening or disruptive. "So there will be people who fall into that category, according to this study, who likely are going to need some some assistance to help deal with this because it is so far-reaching and for some people, potentially, very frightening."
7:10

The Idea of NHI on Earth. ⬇️⬇️⬇️ 🔥"The gravity of it goes up a whole lot if it goes from the theoretical to the verified." ~Dr. Phil 🔥 "There have been people that have reported being abducted over the years. What's the intent behind that? Is it medical? Is it more nefarious?" ~BZ to Dr. Phil (I'm so glad Bryce went there.) "There will be people...who likely are going to need some some assistance to help deal with this because it is so far-reaching and for some people, potentially, very frightening." ~Mellon ~ Dr. Phil: "We know in the last 80 years there have been no overt hostile acts that we know about. That doesn't mean there could be things happening that are attributable to these forces that we don't know about. But, we certainly don't have any attacks that we can attribute to these UAPs or whatever." (Well, there's Colares in 1977. If that was non-human in nature, I'd say that qualifies as overt. And the Thomas Mantell incident in 1948 where he crashed and died after pursuing a UFO. Was that overt? Unfortunately, we don't know what happened and probably never will.) Dr. Phil: "And if the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, I think people can take some comfort in knowing that if they were gonna melt us with a ray gun or something of that nature, they've had ample opportunity to do that. "They may have been here 1000 years before we were here. Who knows what the situation is? But we do know that as long as we've been monitoring this and tracking it, there have been no overt hostile acts and I think people can take some comfort in that, and should." (See the work of Peter Levenda for a deeper look at that. "They might have been attacking us for centuries already, in ways that make sense to them... What if they are attacking us through the manipulation of consciousness? ~Peter Levenda More... ⬇️⬇️⬇️ ~ (I'm glad Bryce pushed back a bit.) Bryce Zabel: "They should. The only thing I would say is, if we're dealing with a non-human intelligence - or an NHI, as we like to say now - we'd have to assume that they think differently than us. So even in our own world, in the United States, we tend to think in four-year terms because of presidential terms, right? So you can't get something off the ground if it can't get done right away. The Chinese may think in 100-year terms when they think about Taiwan or whatever. "It's possible there are alien or non-human intelligences that think in a different time frame. If their time frame was 1000 years, then they could just be getting started. "And on the topic of the nuclear issue, which I share concern of. I mean, I think the nuclear issue means it is at least a national-security issue of some kind. Now, I've heard people talk about this, Dr. Phil, two different ways. Some people say, 'Well, you know, they're looking at our nuclear capabilities because they want to protect us from ourselves.' "Okay, that's great, I hope that's true. But the other would be: what do you do before you actually go to war with anybody, is you do reconnaissance. You try to find out what the other guy has. What are their assets? What are their capabilities?" (That may freak out some people but all angles should be considered.) Zabel: "So, I think the problem that we need to overcome in this country is getting to a place where we understand this phenomenon that we're encountering enough that we can at least start to figure out intent. What is the intent? "There have been people that have reported being abducted over the years. What's the intent behind that? Is it medical? Is it more nefarious? What is it? And so, we got a lot of work to do, and I think that's why I am so supportive of your current efforts because you're, basically, saying, 'Let's get started, people. Let's really take this seriously. Let's quit fooling around and stigmatizing people that want to take it seriously, and let's get to work.' But let's get to work as a human race. Let's start sharing what we know and let's make progress. That's where I'm coming from, too." (Bringing up abductions is important because it IS part of this discussion and it shouldn't be avoided. Kudos to Bryce!) Dr. Phil: "I saw a study that said 71% of Americans believe that there are aliens that have been or are in our earthly space. And it's interesting...I read that in one context, it said, 'Look, this is not going to be such a big deal if this gets verified.' "You know, there's one thing to say that in the abstract, like, 'Yeah, I think yeah probably there are.' It's a whole other different situation if you turn around and see somebody standing there. The gravity of it goes up a whole lot if it goes from the theoretical to the verified. (100%. That's my favorite part of the interview and it's so true.) Dr. Phil: "And I hope that we are going to put enough context around this, particularly knowing that there are segments of our population that are very vulnerable. There are some elderly folks that aren't up on technology and might be overwhelmed by the reality of this. "We have certain populations that might be easily disoriented or destabilized in the mental emotional fringes of the population. And I worry about those that are easily exploitable. You know, you need to get out of the urban areas, buy our buried school bus in the mountains, and you'll be safe forever. You know the con artists and the scammers are going to find every opportunity to prey upon those that are concerned and worried about this. "And I think we need to be prepared to take care of those that might be destabilized by this information that's coming out right now, we can't pretend they aren't there. We've made those mistakes in the past, like during COVID, for example. There are those that are more impacted than others, and we need to be prepared to handle that." Christopher K. Mellon: "We, recently, commissioned a study by a group of six psychologists, PhD psychologists, on this topic of how the public would receive this information. And it was generally very encouraging. And what they found was that the great bulk of the population, as they have in the past with other epical changes such as the Copernican principle, or evolution, or general relativity, it takes people a while to process this information. There's a period of resistance. But most people will get up, get out of bed, go to work the next day. They're not devastated, even though there's nothing quite comparable to this, perhaps." (There's no perhaps. A government or respected figure admitting that we're not alone on this planet would be unprecedented and there is NOTHING we can compare it to.) Mellon: "What the study did find is that there is likely, however, to be a subset of people, maybe 15% of the population, that are going to need some help. And that we are not necessarily prepared in our present state to provide that kind of assistance, and we need to be doing more to get ready for that." (If he's talking world population, that's about 1.2 BILLION people who are going to need some help dealing with this. Holy crap. 😬) Mellon: "And also, to work on the messaging. The messaging is so important, clear and consistent messaging from the government, trying to develop trust with the American people so that the information is is accepted and acted on." (For me, I want the whole truth more than the right "message.") Mellon: "A lot of the difference will be people who can't get their head around it, even though they really understand it. But because of their own belief structure, the architecture of their own belief structure, for some reason, in their particular individual case, it's particularly threatening or disruptive. "So there will be people who fall into that category, according to this study, who likely are going to need some some assistance to help deal with this because it is so far-reaching and for some people, potentially, very frightening."

Joe Murgia

31,404 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

💬: what have you learned about each other that only time together could teach you? 🥟: i think we've learned so many things about each other that we even know the things that we didn't need to know. if count from our trainee days, we've been together for almost 10 years or even more than 10 years. what have we learned? i've learned a lot from seeing how passionate everyone is about what they do, how dedicated they are to everything and we're a team that really loves what we do and i think i've learned a lot from that. in the future, we'll continue learning from one another, working even harder and discovering new things about each other. i think that's how it will be! 🦊: as the maknae, i'd say that even the members are one, two, three and four years older than the maknae, our ideas aren't that different. i think we're all on a pretty similar level!
0:57

💬: what have you learned about each other that only time together could teach you? 🥟: i think we've learned so many things about each other that we even know the things that we didn't need to know. if count from our trainee days, we've been together for almost 10 years or even more than 10 years. what have we learned? i've learned a lot from seeing how passionate everyone is about what they do, how dedicated they are to everything and we're a team that really loves what we do and i think i've learned a lot from that. in the future, we'll continue learning from one another, working even harder and discovering new things about each other. i think that's how it will be! 🦊: as the maknae, i'd say that even the members are one, two, three and four years older than the maknae, our ideas aren't that different. i think we're all on a pretty similar level!

비니2

37,214 Aufrufe • vor 5 Tagen

Gov. Walz: There will come a day where you're going to be sitting on that rocking chair, and the little ones are going to ask you, ‘When everything was on the line, and there was somebody running who asked to be a dictator and wanted to overturn the Constitution and talked about using the military against our people, what did you do to stop that from happening?’ Volunteer now:
0:52

Gov. Walz: There will come a day where you're going to be sitting on that rocking chair, and the little ones are going to ask you, ‘When everything was on the line, and there was somebody running who asked to be a dictator and wanted to overturn the Constitution and talked about using the military against our people, what did you do to stop that from happening?’ Volunteer now:

Headquarters

692,138 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

VanEck CEO Jan van Eck on CNBC: “There’s something else going on within the Bitcoin community that non-crypto people need to know about. And that is: ultimately, VanEck has been around before Bitcoin. We will walk away from Bitcoin if we think the thesis is fundamentally broken. We don’t right now, but you always have to look at the underlying technology and the crypto. What the Bitcoin community has been asking itself is: Is there enough encryption in Bitcoin, because quantum computing is coming? And secondly: Is there enough privacy in Bitcoin? And so a lot of Bitcoin OGs or maxis have been looking at Zcash. Zcash is a token. It’s sort of related to Bitcoin with a lot more privacy. The kind of garbage that we got about Bitcoin four years ago was: ‘It’s used for all bad illicit behavior.’ But now everyone kind of realizes that when you move money around on the Bitcoin blockchain, you can see it. You can see it move from one wallet to another. And a lot of people are looking for more privacy.”
1:00

VanEck CEO Jan van Eck on CNBC: “There’s something else going on within the Bitcoin community that non-crypto people need to know about. And that is: ultimately, VanEck has been around before Bitcoin. We will walk away from Bitcoin if we think the thesis is fundamentally broken. We don’t right now, but you always have to look at the underlying technology and the crypto. What the Bitcoin community has been asking itself is: Is there enough encryption in Bitcoin, because quantum computing is coming? And secondly: Is there enough privacy in Bitcoin? And so a lot of Bitcoin OGs or maxis have been looking at Zcash. Zcash is a token. It’s sort of related to Bitcoin with a lot more privacy. The kind of garbage that we got about Bitcoin four years ago was: ‘It’s used for all bad illicit behavior.’ But now everyone kind of realizes that when you move money around on the Bitcoin blockchain, you can see it. You can see it move from one wallet to another. And a lot of people are looking for more privacy.”

Arjun Khemani

595,011 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Jean Charest: "We're not as big as the United States. We know that. We have to be more strategic. We have to be smarter. And we have to have a hard look at ourselves and our own economy and what it is that we have to do here at home to make ourselves more competitive. So that 20 years from now we thank Donald Trump."
0:35

Jean Charest: "We're not as big as the United States. We know that. We have to be more strategic. We have to be smarter. And we have to have a hard look at ourselves and our own economy and what it is that we have to do here at home to make ourselves more competitive. So that 20 years from now we thank Donald Trump."

Scott Robertson

153,492 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Jensen to AI Leaders: “We have to be far more thoughtful” when communicating to the public Jensen Huang: “(AI) is not a biological being. It is not alien. It is not conscious. It is computer software.” “We say things like, ‘We don't understand it at all.’ It is not true. We understand a lot of things about this technology.” Chamath: “If you were in the seat in the boardroom of Anthropic over that whole scuttlebutt with the Department of War, what do you think you would've told Dario and that team to do, maybe, differently to try to change some of this outcome and some of this perception?” Jensen: “The first thing that I would say about Anthropic is, first of all, the technology is incredible. We are a large consumer of Anthropic technology.” “The desire to warn people about the capability of the technology is also really terrific.” “We just have to make sure that we understand that the world has a spectrum, and that warning is good, scaring is less good because this technology is too important to us.” “I think that it is fine to predict the future, but we need to be a little bit more circumspect. We need to have a little bit more humility, that, in fact, we can't completely predict the future.” “And to say things that are quite extreme, quite catastrophic, that there's no evidence of it happening, could be more damaging than people think.” “And of course we are technology leaders.” “There was a time when nobody listened to us, but now because technology is so important in the social fabric, such an important industry, so important to national security, our words do matter.” “And I think we have to be much more circumspect, we have to be more moderate, we have to be more balanced, we have to be far more thoughtful.”
1:27

Jensen to AI Leaders: “We have to be far more thoughtful” when communicating to the public Jensen Huang: “(AI) is not a biological being. It is not alien. It is not conscious. It is computer software.” “We say things like, ‘We don't understand it at all.’ It is not true. We understand a lot of things about this technology.” Chamath: “If you were in the seat in the boardroom of Anthropic over that whole scuttlebutt with the Department of War, what do you think you would've told Dario and that team to do, maybe, differently to try to change some of this outcome and some of this perception?” Jensen: “The first thing that I would say about Anthropic is, first of all, the technology is incredible. We are a large consumer of Anthropic technology.” “The desire to warn people about the capability of the technology is also really terrific.” “We just have to make sure that we understand that the world has a spectrum, and that warning is good, scaring is less good because this technology is too important to us.” “I think that it is fine to predict the future, but we need to be a little bit more circumspect. We need to have a little bit more humility, that, in fact, we can't completely predict the future.” “And to say things that are quite extreme, quite catastrophic, that there's no evidence of it happening, could be more damaging than people think.” “And of course we are technology leaders.” “There was a time when nobody listened to us, but now because technology is so important in the social fabric, such an important industry, so important to national security, our words do matter.” “And I think we have to be much more circumspect, we have to be more moderate, we have to be more balanced, we have to be far more thoughtful.”

The All-In Podcast

57,581 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Anna Paulina Luna on UFOs -“we're hoping to present that information and at least acknowledge it from a government perspective that we are not alone, but also let's see what the evidence is.” “The biggest information problems that we've had with UAPs is the amount of stonewalling stove piping, and also it seems that there is this push to gaslight the American people into looking at the evidence and then not fully believing it. I think for us, if we're writing the budget, for example, into the Pentagon, if we're writing the budget overall for whatever programs might be out there, why is it that members of Congress who are given a top secret security clearance are being denied access? That's not a free and true government, and so for us, especially being that we have now a Secretary of State who's actually open to Declassify Declassification and Marco Rubio, we're hoping to present that information and at least acknowledge it from a government perspective that we are not alone, but also let's see what the evidence is”
0:46

Anna Paulina Luna on UFOs -“we're hoping to present that information and at least acknowledge it from a government perspective that we are not alone, but also let's see what the evidence is.” “The biggest information problems that we've had with UAPs is the amount of stonewalling stove piping, and also it seems that there is this push to gaslight the American people into looking at the evidence and then not fully believing it. I think for us, if we're writing the budget, for example, into the Pentagon, if we're writing the budget overall for whatever programs might be out there, why is it that members of Congress who are given a top secret security clearance are being denied access? That's not a free and true government, and so for us, especially being that we have now a Secretary of State who's actually open to Declassify Declassification and Marco Rubio, we're hoping to present that information and at least acknowledge it from a government perspective that we are not alone, but also let's see what the evidence is”

neandrewthal

147,966 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

"But we're not hearing the government talk about what positive benefits might actually emerge from a renewed agreement." "Because the longer we don't pursue that and have stability, the longer we jeopardize future investment in Canada." "And we keep having this, you know, this threat hanging over our industry." "So I think we need to be looking at this with a little more, frankly, optimism of what we can bring to the table as opposed to what negative retaliation might exist considering we're one tenth the economic size of the us." Kate Harrison
2:25

"But we're not hearing the government talk about what positive benefits might actually emerge from a renewed agreement." "Because the longer we don't pursue that and have stability, the longer we jeopardize future investment in Canada." "And we keep having this, you know, this threat hanging over our industry." "So I think we need to be looking at this with a little more, frankly, optimism of what we can bring to the table as opposed to what negative retaliation might exist considering we're one tenth the economic size of the us." Kate Harrison

cbcwatcher

18,599 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

"If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world." ~EB Did Burlison See a Craft at the Location He Visited? Umm, No. (Long one here with a transcript and my comments in ( ). Work today so I was a little limited with this stuff. Looking forward to the Davis interview tomorrow!) In 2025, Rep. Eric Burlison spent "almost the entire day" with the White House staff as they negotiated various aspects of the Big Beautiful Bill. While he was there, he requested help with the UFO topic because the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets kept getting blocked and struggled to get access to certain information and locations. So, he asked for a White House-level briefing, "the same briefing the President... If you're taking the request, that's my highest request." (He didn't say if he ever received that briefing.) Burlison: "Furthermore, I would like to be able to have a green light to go visit some of these locations. And the gentleman that I was asking kind of smirked. And I said, 'Is this comical to you? I mean, do you think that I'm not a serious person?'" (I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? 😀 ) Burlison: "He said, 'No.' he goes. 'I just want to go with you.' And so, it turns out he did. He was able to go with me. He had to follow the proper channels as well. And we visited the first of many sites, hopefully. I'm gonna be cautious in talking about that because I don't want to jeopardize the ability to go to the remaining locations, if you will. I truly think that, for them, this was a test of whether or not this would become a circus for them. And so, I think that I'm just treading cautiously before I release too much information about what I've learned and where I went." (I understand not giving out the location to avoid a "circus" of UFO people trying to visit, but I don't see why he can't tell us what he learned right now. Hopefully, when all the visits are done, he can share the details with us.) James Fox: "Congressman, when you say you went to visit the site, are you implying that the alleged site that could, potentially, be housing non-human technology? Is that kind of what one is alleging here?" Burlison: "Yeah. Or, once did house non-human technology, right? Now, from my insights from Grusch and others, they had...it was pretty obvious that that first site that we were going to did not have active material, but, potentially, could have in the past. So what was important was to see the facilities and the structures, and to try to ascertain for A), first and foremost, did those facilities exist? And then were they designed in such a way that would have been, you know, one could easily see that that could have been utilized for reverse engineering." (Saying that a location/facility could have been utilized for reverse engineering craft not made by humans is not enough to make the waves we need to force the tidal wave of Disclosure. We need for Burlison (or someone else) to be able to visit a facility that has a craft there now, and folks working on it who are willing to speak about their experiences there. I don't see that happening any time soon.) Leslie Kean: "May I ask If the people at the site were cooperative and helpful for you?" Burlison: "Yes." Leslie Kean: "Or were they resistant to having you visit?" Burlison: "No, they were very cooperative. What I kind of interpreted from this is that a lot of what's happening today is that you have things that have happened in the past, and the people today, you know, you're talking about personnel that have changed over many times. And so, a lot of times they're not aware of the history of some of the things that you're talking about because that's not something that they're working on, currently. But they certainly were extremely helpful." (They were either not aware of the history or, they were, and lied about it. Can't rule that out. And the fact that they were helpful/cooperative doesn't really mean much. If you want to avoid unwanted attention, you put your best face on. Or, maybe they really were ignorant and wanted to do their best to help Burlison and the other folks? No way to know.) Burlison: "I had specifically wanted to meet with a particular individual that works at that location, and I actually expected them to turn me down, but was surprised that they actually arranged a meeting in a SCIF with the person that I requested. So, I do think that they're being cooperative." (Hopefully, when all of these locations have been visited, we get to learn this person's name. Full transparency, right?) Burlison: "And now that the President has [posted on Truth Social about UFOs], I think it gives everyone all the way down the line an understanding that this is to be taken seriously and to follow through." (We shall see.) Burlison: "On the way back after the visit, the White House staffer and the other person that had made it happen both said to me that they loved doing this. This was one of the funnest things they've ever done in their job, and that these other future site locations are not at all gonna be a burden to them. If anything, they're excited and looking forward to it." (Are we going to learn who those people are? Transparency? If not, why not? We pay their salaries.) James Fox: "I had a really quick follow-up question, Congressman. If you did find what you're looking for, is there a particular protocol, or what's the directive if you find what you're looking for?" Burlison: "If I find what I'm looking for, I'm gonna be very careful to protect any kind of national-security interest. But at the same time, I've been very clear that it is not the right of this country to withhold basic, fundamental evidence that we may or may not be alone. And so, if we have any kind of evidence of that, we should be telling the world and not holding back. And give as many details as possible, and release...be as transparent as possible without jeopardizing our secrets and national security. Or secrets that pertain...that our national security is dependent upon." (For now, keep the method of propulsion (energy source) secret and away from our adversaries and tell us everything else!) Burlison: "Well, I'm just gonna speculate, okay? If we have a type of technology that we have reverse engineered, that gives us a strategic advantage that our adversaries have not? I think that, for example, letting the world know that we have this craft, here it is, here's a photo of it, but you don't have to tell the world how exactly the...what you've reverse engineered, or how that operates." (Photos aren't going to cut it. If they exist, we need to see these craft (and bodies?) in person, with our own eyes. Put them in the Smithsonian and let us see all of it. And allow independent scientists to do their own analysis so we can verify that it's non-human or anomalous.) Burlison: "In the same way that when the nuclear bomb first was invented and utilized, the world knew, we revealed to the world that we have this capability, but we certainly are not gonna tell people how to make one and the specifics behind that. So, I think that for me, that's how I would answer that question. If you were asking me, 'What would you be willing to protect as far as national security?' That would be the nature of it. "Now, I think if the technology that's derived has nothing to do with changing our threat dynamic with an adversary, and it might benefit society and the world, by all means, let's release it. Let's let the world scientific minds utilize anything that we might have discovered. And so, that's where I personally stand." (But we all that it's not going to be that simple. Most likely (if this is all legit), we'll have craft and bodies, and the tech from the craft can give us an advantage over our adversaries, while at the same time, potentially, be used to change and improve the world and human condition. So what do we do? Keep it secret? Tell the world and take our chances?) Burlison: "I don't know, I couldn't tell you what Hillary meant by that." (EB was referring to the recent interview/deposition about Epstein where Hillary Clinton said that she would release UFO files but they would be "subject to any national security implications" and it should be done so that "no national security information is disclosed." She didn't get specific.) Burlison: "If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world. If we, you know, if what Eric Davis said to me - and now that was not in a hearing in which he had been sworn in, and I'm not saying that he was telling me a falsehood - when he said that there are four alien species - and that kind of went viral - I mean, if we, if we do have evidence of that, I want the world to know. I don't see why that would be of national security interest to withhold that from the world." (Unless, the people who have seen the bodies say something like, "Their skin is something that can be used as armor and we can't allow our adversaries to learn about that. Just trying to think of reasons why the gatekeepers will tell us that information needs to be kept secret.)
7:02

"If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world." ~EB Did Burlison See a Craft at the Location He Visited? Umm, No. (Long one here with a transcript and my comments in ( ). Work today so I was a little limited with this stuff. Looking forward to the Davis interview tomorrow!) In 2025, Rep. Eric Burlison spent "almost the entire day" with the White House staff as they negotiated various aspects of the Big Beautiful Bill. While he was there, he requested help with the UFO topic because the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets kept getting blocked and struggled to get access to certain information and locations. So, he asked for a White House-level briefing, "the same briefing the President... If you're taking the request, that's my highest request." (He didn't say if he ever received that briefing.) Burlison: "Furthermore, I would like to be able to have a green light to go visit some of these locations. And the gentleman that I was asking kind of smirked. And I said, 'Is this comical to you? I mean, do you think that I'm not a serious person?'" (I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? 😀 ) Burlison: "He said, 'No.' he goes. 'I just want to go with you.' And so, it turns out he did. He was able to go with me. He had to follow the proper channels as well. And we visited the first of many sites, hopefully. I'm gonna be cautious in talking about that because I don't want to jeopardize the ability to go to the remaining locations, if you will. I truly think that, for them, this was a test of whether or not this would become a circus for them. And so, I think that I'm just treading cautiously before I release too much information about what I've learned and where I went." (I understand not giving out the location to avoid a "circus" of UFO people trying to visit, but I don't see why he can't tell us what he learned right now. Hopefully, when all the visits are done, he can share the details with us.) James Fox: "Congressman, when you say you went to visit the site, are you implying that the alleged site that could, potentially, be housing non-human technology? Is that kind of what one is alleging here?" Burlison: "Yeah. Or, once did house non-human technology, right? Now, from my insights from Grusch and others, they had...it was pretty obvious that that first site that we were going to did not have active material, but, potentially, could have in the past. So what was important was to see the facilities and the structures, and to try to ascertain for A), first and foremost, did those facilities exist? And then were they designed in such a way that would have been, you know, one could easily see that that could have been utilized for reverse engineering." (Saying that a location/facility could have been utilized for reverse engineering craft not made by humans is not enough to make the waves we need to force the tidal wave of Disclosure. We need for Burlison (or someone else) to be able to visit a facility that has a craft there now, and folks working on it who are willing to speak about their experiences there. I don't see that happening any time soon.) Leslie Kean: "May I ask If the people at the site were cooperative and helpful for you?" Burlison: "Yes." Leslie Kean: "Or were they resistant to having you visit?" Burlison: "No, they were very cooperative. What I kind of interpreted from this is that a lot of what's happening today is that you have things that have happened in the past, and the people today, you know, you're talking about personnel that have changed over many times. And so, a lot of times they're not aware of the history of some of the things that you're talking about because that's not something that they're working on, currently. But they certainly were extremely helpful." (They were either not aware of the history or, they were, and lied about it. Can't rule that out. And the fact that they were helpful/cooperative doesn't really mean much. If you want to avoid unwanted attention, you put your best face on. Or, maybe they really were ignorant and wanted to do their best to help Burlison and the other folks? No way to know.) Burlison: "I had specifically wanted to meet with a particular individual that works at that location, and I actually expected them to turn me down, but was surprised that they actually arranged a meeting in a SCIF with the person that I requested. So, I do think that they're being cooperative." (Hopefully, when all of these locations have been visited, we get to learn this person's name. Full transparency, right?) Burlison: "And now that the President has [posted on Truth Social about UFOs], I think it gives everyone all the way down the line an understanding that this is to be taken seriously and to follow through." (We shall see.) Burlison: "On the way back after the visit, the White House staffer and the other person that had made it happen both said to me that they loved doing this. This was one of the funnest things they've ever done in their job, and that these other future site locations are not at all gonna be a burden to them. If anything, they're excited and looking forward to it." (Are we going to learn who those people are? Transparency? If not, why not? We pay their salaries.) James Fox: "I had a really quick follow-up question, Congressman. If you did find what you're looking for, is there a particular protocol, or what's the directive if you find what you're looking for?" Burlison: "If I find what I'm looking for, I'm gonna be very careful to protect any kind of national-security interest. But at the same time, I've been very clear that it is not the right of this country to withhold basic, fundamental evidence that we may or may not be alone. And so, if we have any kind of evidence of that, we should be telling the world and not holding back. And give as many details as possible, and release...be as transparent as possible without jeopardizing our secrets and national security. Or secrets that pertain...that our national security is dependent upon." (For now, keep the method of propulsion (energy source) secret and away from our adversaries and tell us everything else!) Burlison: "Well, I'm just gonna speculate, okay? If we have a type of technology that we have reverse engineered, that gives us a strategic advantage that our adversaries have not? I think that, for example, letting the world know that we have this craft, here it is, here's a photo of it, but you don't have to tell the world how exactly the...what you've reverse engineered, or how that operates." (Photos aren't going to cut it. If they exist, we need to see these craft (and bodies?) in person, with our own eyes. Put them in the Smithsonian and let us see all of it. And allow independent scientists to do their own analysis so we can verify that it's non-human or anomalous.) Burlison: "In the same way that when the nuclear bomb first was invented and utilized, the world knew, we revealed to the world that we have this capability, but we certainly are not gonna tell people how to make one and the specifics behind that. So, I think that for me, that's how I would answer that question. If you were asking me, 'What would you be willing to protect as far as national security?' That would be the nature of it. "Now, I think if the technology that's derived has nothing to do with changing our threat dynamic with an adversary, and it might benefit society and the world, by all means, let's release it. Let's let the world scientific minds utilize anything that we might have discovered. And so, that's where I personally stand." (But we all that it's not going to be that simple. Most likely (if this is all legit), we'll have craft and bodies, and the tech from the craft can give us an advantage over our adversaries, while at the same time, potentially, be used to change and improve the world and human condition. So what do we do? Keep it secret? Tell the world and take our chances?) Burlison: "I don't know, I couldn't tell you what Hillary meant by that." (EB was referring to the recent interview/deposition about Epstein where Hillary Clinton said that she would release UFO files but they would be "subject to any national security implications" and it should be done so that "no national security information is disclosed." She didn't get specific.) Burlison: "If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world. If we, you know, if what Eric Davis said to me - and now that was not in a hearing in which he had been sworn in, and I'm not saying that he was telling me a falsehood - when he said that there are four alien species - and that kind of went viral - I mean, if we, if we do have evidence of that, I want the world to know. I don't see why that would be of national security interest to withhold that from the world." (Unless, the people who have seen the bodies say something like, "Their skin is something that can be used as armor and we can't allow our adversaries to learn about that. Just trying to think of reasons why the gatekeepers will tell us that information needs to be kept secret.)

Joe Murgia

18,951 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

PSAKI: There are a number of people in the Democratic Party who have called for reforms to the Supreme Court. What do you think about that? SHAPIRO: "We need to be open to all of that and more."
0:37

PSAKI: There are a number of people in the Democratic Party who have called for reforms to the Supreme Court. What do you think about that? SHAPIRO: "We need to be open to all of that and more."

RNC Research

32,607 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten