正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Sometimes, all it takes is one simple question. This interview is a reminder that behind every public figure is a human being. As H.E. Edwin W. Sifuna reflected on the Mumbai trip when they went to fetch Baba, you could see the weight he had been carrying. He wasn't... show more

Israel Jan

1,663 subscribers

108,494 次观看 • 2 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

教育新闻政治

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

21 条评论

Steve Ngaine 的头像

Steve Ngaine2 个月前

Only Sifuna could observe the dirty game ruto was playing with those closest to baba esp Junet.

Israel Jan 的头像

Israel Jan2 个月前

He saw the scheme very well.

Omusamia 的头像

Omusamia2 个月前

The weight in his voice, he just held back tears hapo

Israel Jan 的头像

Israel Jan2 个月前

Kabisa

Gailey Akivaga 的头像

Gailey Akivaga2 个月前

Yvonne akiniuliza why were you angry I could cry 😂😂😂

Israel Jan 的头像

Israel Jan2 个月前

😂😂😂

zh7tv 的头像

zh7tv2 个月前

Sometimes a question can reveal the emotions behind the story... ❤️

Israel Jan 的头像

Israel Jan2 个月前

It did, he let his guard down.

zh7tv 的头像

zh7tv2 个月前

Trust can be a strength, but also a risk...

Friday 的头像

Friday2 个月前

hio tone ni ya kamapenzi flani

Israel Jan 的头像

Israel Jan2 个月前

Hata kaniwewe ungedodge kweli.

Sly Mzalendo🇰🇪 的头像

Sly Mzalendo🇰🇪2 个月前

Senje has always been the smartest girl in the room, that question was very strategic.

DON SANTO 🦁 的头像

DON SANTO 🦁2 个月前

@el_ngoya @YvonneOkwara is professional and charming.

njogu_silva 的头像

njogu_silva2 个月前

Ata mimi nigesema kila kitu.

Kaisari254 的头像

Kaisari2542 个月前

The tone on "why were you angry" aaah shukisha dereva ni hapa

Triza chengoli 的头像

Triza chengoli2 个月前

We have seen you transversing accross other countries why not Nairobi we are waiting for that rally

Israel Jan 的头像

Israel Jan2 个月前

Nairobi is the Grand Homecoming

Pauline Njau 的头像

Pauline Njau2 个月前

This man loved Baba

Triza chengoli 的头像

Triza chengoli2 个月前

We have seen you transversing accross other countries why not Nairobi we are waiting for you H.E

JayGlo 的头像

JayGlo2 个月前

When will this guy stop complaining ? H

starvon 的头像

starvon2 个月前

Nobody to ask me why were you angry

相关视频

A Hasidic Jew was passing through border security when the officer began asking him the usual questions. Before leaving, he asked the officer one question of his own: “Are you Jewish?” “Yes,” the officer replied. “Would you like to put on tefillin?” The officer hesitated for a moment… then said yes. Minutes later, they were wrapping tefillin together. A beautiful reminder that you don’t have to be Chabad, or even religious, to help another Jew connect with G-d. Sometimes all it takes is asking one simple question.

A Hasidic Jew was passing through border security when the officer began asking him the usual questions. Before leaving, he asked the officer one question of his own: “Are you Jewish?” “Yes,” the officer replied. “Would you like to put on tefillin?” The officer hesitated for a moment… then said yes. Minutes later, they were wrapping tefillin together. A beautiful reminder that you don’t have to be Chabad, or even religious, to help another Jew connect with G-d. Sometimes all it takes is asking one simple question.

Yossi Farro

156,079 次观看 • 1 个月前

Suozzi: When that guy asked Zelenskyy a question, he said, 'You don’t have a suit? You come in here without a suit on?' That was Marjorie Taylor Greene’s boyfriend. Why is he asking questions in the Oval Office, and why doesn’t he ask that question when Elon Musk shows up?

Suozzi: When that guy asked Zelenskyy a question, he said, 'You don’t have a suit? You come in here without a suit on?' That was Marjorie Taylor Greene’s boyfriend. Why is he asking questions in the Oval Office, and why doesn’t he ask that question when Elon Musk shows up?

Acyn

1,456,993 次观看 • 1 年前

A BBC interviewer asked a Nobel physicist the simplest question in the world: why do two magnets push each other apart. He refused to answer it. What he did instead is the best seven minutes on thinking ever filmed. The man is Richard Feynman, at home in 1983, no blackboard, no notes, sitting in an armchair. He does not dodge because he cannot answer. He dodges because he wants you to see what the question is actually asking. So he takes an ordinary sentence, that a woman slipped on the ice and broke her hip, and starts asking why, and every answer opens another why, until the ground gives way. Then he turns it around on the interviewer with a question about ice that sounds trivial and is not. The point he arrives at is the uncomfortable one. Every explanation is only a translation into something you already accept without explanation. Magnets have no such translation. There is nothing more familiar than magnetism to reduce magnetism to, which is why every answer you were given at school was a picture, not a reason. It matters more now than it did in 1983. Any tool will hand you a fluent answer in a second. Knowing which questions actually have a bottom is the part that is still yours. One question. Seven minutes. It is in the video.

A BBC interviewer asked a Nobel physicist the simplest question in the world: why do two magnets push each other apart. He refused to answer it. What he did instead is the best seven minutes on thinking ever filmed. The man is Richard Feynman, at home in 1983, no blackboard, no notes, sitting in an armchair. He does not dodge because he cannot answer. He dodges because he wants you to see what the question is actually asking. So he takes an ordinary sentence, that a woman slipped on the ice and broke her hip, and starts asking why, and every answer opens another why, until the ground gives way. Then he turns it around on the interviewer with a question about ice that sounds trivial and is not. The point he arrives at is the uncomfortable one. Every explanation is only a translation into something you already accept without explanation. Magnets have no such translation. There is nothing more familiar than magnetism to reduce magnetism to, which is why every answer you were given at school was a picture, not a reason. It matters more now than it did in 1983. Any tool will hand you a fluent answer in a second. Knowing which questions actually have a bottom is the part that is still yours. One question. Seven minutes. It is in the video.

Stefan.

3,013,600 次观看 • 2 个月前

Carney was asked about Alberta separation. His warning to Albertans? A “very dangerous bluff.” Then he compared it to Brexit. Interesting. The Bloc said Alberta should decide Alberta’s question. Carney says separation is a dangerous bluff and Ottawa is reviewing the question under the Clarity Act. That contrast tells you everything. Albertans are not angry because Ottawa listens too much. They are angry because Ottawa lectures, judges, reviews, delays, blocks, taxes, and then acts shocked when the country starts cracking. Then Carney calls the anger a bluff. That should go well.

Carney was asked about Alberta separation. His warning to Albertans? A “very dangerous bluff.” Then he compared it to Brexit. Interesting. The Bloc said Alberta should decide Alberta’s question. Carney says separation is a dangerous bluff and Ottawa is reviewing the question under the Clarity Act. That contrast tells you everything. Albertans are not angry because Ottawa listens too much. They are angry because Ottawa lectures, judges, reviews, delays, blocks, taxes, and then acts shocked when the country starts cracking. Then Carney calls the anger a bluff. That should go well.

The Real Mr Bench

39,217 次观看 • 4 个月前

Music snobs crying in the comments as is Robbie wasn't the one Ozzy asked to join him when he was given a star on the walk of fame. Not only that, Robbie is one hell of a performer. He will give this tribute everything he has.

Music snobs crying in the comments as is Robbie wasn't the one Ozzy asked to join him when he was given a star on the walk of fame. Not only that, Robbie is one hell of a performer. He will give this tribute everything he has.

lucy ♡

144,737 次观看 • 7 个月前

David Beckham reveals what most people don't see about Lionel Messi "He is more than just natural talent" "The one thing that Leo is good at is teaching. He's good at teaching the young players that are coming in from the academy." "He arrived at about 6:50am and the team wasn't training till 10am... He's in the gym, he's warming up... he’s doing all of the things that you expect a young kid to do." "If I had to describe him with one word, he's a winner. It's as simple as that." "He's still hungry for championships. He still gets angry at players for not doing the right thing. He still gets angry when he loses games."

David Beckham reveals what most people don't see about Lionel Messi "He is more than just natural talent" "The one thing that Leo is good at is teaching. He's good at teaching the young players that are coming in from the academy." "He arrived at about 6:50am and the team wasn't training till 10am... He's in the gym, he's warming up... he’s doing all of the things that you expect a young kid to do." "If I had to describe him with one word, he's a winner. It's as simple as that." "He's still hungry for championships. He still gets angry at players for not doing the right thing. He still gets angry when he loses games."

Fibonacci 🥷

85,436 次观看 • 3 个月前

Yvonne Okwara Yvonne Okwara, if you have the opportunity to interview Sifu, I hope you could ask him the following questions: 1. Does he still maintain that H.E. Rigathi Gachagua was rightfully impeached? What is the basis of his position today? 2. There have been public allegations that KSh 150 million was distributed to influence the impeachment process. What is his response to those allegations? Can he categorically state whether he received any such funds, and if so, explain the purpose for which they were used? 3. In light of subsequent legal developments, does he still believe the impeachment was justified? Additionally, does he believe the courts should allow H.E. Rigathi Gachagua to contest for public office in the upcoming elections? These questions would help provide the public with greater clarity on matters that have generated significant public interest.

Yvonne Okwara Yvonne Okwara, if you have the opportunity to interview Sifu, I hope you could ask him the following questions: 1. Does he still maintain that H.E. Rigathi Gachagua was rightfully impeached? What is the basis of his position today? 2. There have been public allegations that KSh 150 million was distributed to influence the impeachment process. What is his response to those allegations? Can he categorically state whether he received any such funds, and if so, explain the purpose for which they were used? 3. In light of subsequent legal developments, does he still believe the impeachment was justified? Additionally, does he believe the courts should allow H.E. Rigathi Gachagua to contest for public office in the upcoming elections? These questions would help provide the public with greater clarity on matters that have generated significant public interest.

Hon. Peter Salasya

87,266 次观看 • 2 个月前

He is Manoj Muntashir, Writer. He is writer of Adipurush which is based on Bhagwan Shri Ram. Earlier it was claimed by him that he has read Valmiki’s Ramayana for this movie and has written every dialogue by removing shoes & slippers. But when today he is asked why has he mocked our sanatana dharma, he said don’t question me, question Om Raut for it. He is the one who started all this. So now blame game has been started.

He is Manoj Muntashir, Writer. He is writer of Adipurush which is based on Bhagwan Shri Ram. Earlier it was claimed by him that he has read Valmiki’s Ramayana for this movie and has written every dialogue by removing shoes & slippers. But when today he is asked why has he mocked our sanatana dharma, he said don’t question me, question Om Raut for it. He is the one who started all this. So now blame game has been started.

Dr Nimo Yadav 2.0

428,075 次观看 • 3 年前

Analysis form this game Is that nunez is a mystery that no one can understand. When he had a touch on the ball after salah was fouled I remember screaming you could have left it for a foul and then he scored it and I’m like well well Then he still went ahead to miss the easy ones again I wish we never let kelleher leave.

Analysis form this game Is that nunez is a mystery that no one can understand. When he had a touch on the ball after salah was fouled I remember screaming you could have left it for a foul and then he scored it and I’m like well well Then he still went ahead to miss the easy ones again I wish we never let kelleher leave.

Ipostanything LFC

145,716 次观看 • 5 个月前

The Miz on not being casted as Johnny Cage in Mortal Kombat 2. “I went out on every interview and every time someone asked me about this question, I would say, ‘I want to be Johnny Cage. I want to be Johnny Cage.’ I never got an audition, which is fine. I mean, maybe they just didn’t see me as the character, And then I heard Karl Urban got it, and I was like, ‘Wow.’ And people were like, ‘Are you mad? Are you angry?’ And it’s like, I never get mad or angry when someone else gets a part that I want.”

The Miz on not being casted as Johnny Cage in Mortal Kombat 2. “I went out on every interview and every time someone asked me about this question, I would say, ‘I want to be Johnny Cage. I want to be Johnny Cage.’ I never got an audition, which is fine. I mean, maybe they just didn’t see me as the character, And then I heard Karl Urban got it, and I was like, ‘Wow.’ And people were like, ‘Are you mad? Are you angry?’ And it’s like, I never get mad or angry when someone else gets a part that I want.”

Popplayzz

164,025 次观看 • 5 个月前

The CEO of OpenAI was asked for his hottest take. His answer wasn't a prediction about a product. It was that the whole world is sleeping through the most important thing happening to it. A student asked Altman for his spiciest take. He paused. He admitted he could probably find a spicier one with more time. Then he landed somewhere quiet. AI is just going to keep going. That sounds obvious until you hear how he framed it. He said this is not widely believed yet. And if it were actually believed, there would be far more reverberations through society right now than there are. That is the whole point. He is not saying people doubt AI is useful. He is saying people have not internalized what continuing on this curve actually means. They nod along and then go back to their day. Then he gave the timeframe. It has been three and a half years since ChatGPT. He said if you run another three and a half years on the same trajectory, what society is capable of is completely different. Not improved. Different. The scariest takes are usually loud. This one was Altman calmly saying the biggest change in human history is already underway, and almost nobody is acting like it. (Watch the full talk on YouTube at Stanford Online channel)

The CEO of OpenAI was asked for his hottest take. His answer wasn't a prediction about a product. It was that the whole world is sleeping through the most important thing happening to it. A student asked Altman for his spiciest take. He paused. He admitted he could probably find a spicier one with more time. Then he landed somewhere quiet. AI is just going to keep going. That sounds obvious until you hear how he framed it. He said this is not widely believed yet. And if it were actually believed, there would be far more reverberations through society right now than there are. That is the whole point. He is not saying people doubt AI is useful. He is saying people have not internalized what continuing on this curve actually means. They nod along and then go back to their day. Then he gave the timeframe. It has been three and a half years since ChatGPT. He said if you run another three and a half years on the same trajectory, what society is capable of is completely different. Not improved. Different. The scariest takes are usually loud. This one was Altman calmly saying the biggest change in human history is already underway, and almost nobody is acting like it. (Watch the full talk on YouTube at Stanford Online channel)

Ihtesham Ali

15,796 次观看 • 3 个月前

Queer theorist Judith Butler attempts a response to Matt Walsh's "What Is a Woman?" and it's just "You're angry and you hate Socrates" "I can't help noting that the people who pound the table like, 'It's a simple fact, we should have a simple answer.' They're angry. They're insistent. They're frustrated. I mean, just look at what the emotional aura is of that claim. 'We need a simple truth.' And like, whoa, why are we so angry about that?" "I ask the same question. What is a woman? Freud asked the question: what does a woman want? But you could also say, what is a woman? My own sensibilities say it's a great question, but it's wondrous. It's wonderful. Let's keep that question open, because you know what? There are going to be a lot of different ways of answering and will give us access to human complexity. And then we'll know more about the world and we'll be able to affirm the human in its complexity rather than putting it into fixed boxes and smashing in those nails. So for me, 'What is a woman' is a great question, but I would just keep it open." "This is a movement that seeks to control knowledge, to suppress knowledge, to stop us from questioning -- even to attack Socrates, who taught us the absolute importance of open inquiry." "The anti-gender ideology movement is an attack on knowledge and an attack on open inquiry."

Queer theorist Judith Butler attempts a response to Matt Walsh's "What Is a Woman?" and it's just "You're angry and you hate Socrates" "I can't help noting that the people who pound the table like, 'It's a simple fact, we should have a simple answer.' They're angry. They're insistent. They're frustrated. I mean, just look at what the emotional aura is of that claim. 'We need a simple truth.' And like, whoa, why are we so angry about that?" "I ask the same question. What is a woman? Freud asked the question: what does a woman want? But you could also say, what is a woman? My own sensibilities say it's a great question, but it's wondrous. It's wonderful. Let's keep that question open, because you know what? There are going to be a lot of different ways of answering and will give us access to human complexity. And then we'll know more about the world and we'll be able to affirm the human in its complexity rather than putting it into fixed boxes and smashing in those nails. So for me, 'What is a woman' is a great question, but I would just keep it open." "This is a movement that seeks to control knowledge, to suppress knowledge, to stop us from questioning -- even to attack Socrates, who taught us the absolute importance of open inquiry." "The anti-gender ideology movement is an attack on knowledge and an attack on open inquiry."

Breitbart News

222,287 次观看 • 3 个月前

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

Stefan.

210,938 次观看 • 1 个月前

While washing he and his girlfriend’s cars this man noticed that on the headlamps on the driver’s side in both vehicles that they were marked. Whenever his girlfriend drove the car it was marked with a “w” for woman. When she had their child with them it had a dot next to the “w” to indicate it was one child. After seeing them he found out about the when he did a little research. If this is true then it shows how elaborate and organized this is, what would you do if you saw these marks on your car?

While washing he and his girlfriend’s cars this man noticed that on the headlamps on the driver’s side in both vehicles that they were marked. Whenever his girlfriend drove the car it was marked with a “w” for woman. When she had their child with them it had a dot next to the “w” to indicate it was one child. After seeing them he found out about the when he did a little research. If this is true then it shows how elaborate and organized this is, what would you do if you saw these marks on your car?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

2,497,861 次观看 • 5 个月前

Ronald Reagan believed that "Every dollar the government gives to someone has to first be taken away from someone else." He then asked a simple question: "Is it fair?" What do you think?

Ronald Reagan believed that "Every dollar the government gives to someone has to first be taken away from someone else." He then asked a simple question: "Is it fair?" What do you think?

Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Institute

168,598 次观看 • 3 个月前

This is not a Game of Thrones reunion. This is the chapter the finale should have been. The one that takes everything Jon Snow survived and asks the only question that was always left unanswered - what was he actually chosen for? This is a Jon Snow fan concept trailer.

This is not a Game of Thrones reunion. This is the chapter the finale should have been. The one that takes everything Jon Snow survived and asks the only question that was always left unanswered - what was he actually chosen for? This is a Jon Snow fan concept trailer.

Frankenstein

82,208 次观看 • 4 个月前

Pope Leo XIV sent a video-message to the young people participating in the annual “SEEK” Youth Conference in the United States. In it, he says Jesus is asking each of us the same question he asked the first disciples: "What do you seek?" This shows that he knew what was in their hearts, and that they were “restless, but in a good way.” The Pope explains there is only one answer to this question: Jesus.

Pope Leo XIV sent a video-message to the young people participating in the annual “SEEK” Youth Conference in the United States. In it, he says Jesus is asking each of us the same question he asked the first disciples: "What do you seek?" This shows that he knew what was in their hearts, and that they were “restless, but in a good way.” The Pope explains there is only one answer to this question: Jesus.

Vatican News

41,529 次观看 • 9 个月前

Every trader thinks the market is a fair fight. Ed Thorp - the man who beat both the casino and Wall Street - explains why some players simply cannot lose, and it is not about being right. Ed Thorp - math professor who broke blackjack, then ran a hedge fund at 20% a year for decades. he points to one firm that went public and had to reveal its record in the prospectus: "for about the last 1300 trading days they had won every day except one - and the one day they didn't win was because they had a computer problem." 1299 winning days out of 1300. that is not prediction - that is access. these players see the order book 30 milliseconds before you do, and 30 milliseconds is the whole game. your edge dies here. you are sizing bets on a coin flip while someone else reads the coin mid-air. the market was never a fair fight - it is tiered, and most traders sit on the tier that pays. he names the firm, the number, and the man who turned Renaissance around - all in one free interview. the edge was never being smart. it is being early.

Every trader thinks the market is a fair fight. Ed Thorp - the man who beat both the casino and Wall Street - explains why some players simply cannot lose, and it is not about being right. Ed Thorp - math professor who broke blackjack, then ran a hedge fund at 20% a year for decades. he points to one firm that went public and had to reveal its record in the prospectus: "for about the last 1300 trading days they had won every day except one - and the one day they didn't win was because they had a computer problem." 1299 winning days out of 1300. that is not prediction - that is access. these players see the order book 30 milliseconds before you do, and 30 milliseconds is the whole game. your edge dies here. you are sizing bets on a coin flip while someone else reads the coin mid-air. the market was never a fair fight - it is tiered, and most traders sit on the tier that pays. he names the firm, the number, and the man who turned Renaissance around - all in one free interview. the edge was never being smart. it is being early.

Di Krass

33,605 次观看 • 1 个月前