Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Sussan Ley left humiliated after insisting there’s Constitutional Risks with #TheVoice but cannot name any expert who agrees, going on to suggest const. experts aren’t relevant Speers “You’re talking about const. Risk, surely you gotta listen to some constitutional experts?”💥

stranger

35,868 subscribers

252,737 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik #TheVoice

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 Kommentare

Profilbild von stranger

strangervor 3 Jahren

Ley even said she would only support constitutional recognition of First Nations people, in the constitution w/out a Voice. And that “we’ve had that on our policy platform since John Howard” Wish Speers came in with “What did you do about it while in govt for a decade Sussan?”

Profilbild von stranger

strangervor 3 Jahren

Ley finished off her answer saying she will “vote No with a heavy heart because this is not the model that will produce the outcomes that I want to see” Shameless, really. For 9 yrs they did nothing. Now a new govt is elected & steps up to act, but it’s not what Sussan wants.🙄

Profilbild von stranger

strangervor 3 Jahren

And using the term ‘heavy heart’ We know what that is. She’s embarrassed, and wants people to think she feels bad for saying No. Like when a boss has to cut off a loyal employee “With a heavy heart Phil, we have a computer that does your job now, have a good life”

Profilbild von ⭐️Daisy

⭐️Daisyvor 3 Jahren

@MavrosAll2 How the hell this woman was elected is beyond me! I wouldn’t employ her to do my filing, let alone read over contracts or trust her with payroll. Remind us all how much we pay her? How much in super & entitlements on top? We have excellent Australians who SHOULD be in her role

Profilbild von Carlos

Carlosvor 3 Jahren

Well, I for one, will be going to the public for their thoughts on open heart surgery if I need a transplant. I mean, heart surgery specialists have their place, but it's NOT to intrude on debates about heart surgery!!

Profilbild von stranger

strangervor 3 Jahren

Yeh I’ve decided I’m going to build my next house without any expert advice or help, what the hell does a builder or architect know about an ordinary Australian like me?

Profilbild von Barrie Carter

Barrie Cartervor 3 Jahren

TO BE PERFECTLY FAIR THE LIBERAL PARTY HAS NO POLICIES DIDN'T ONE OF THEIR FEMALE POLITICIANS SAY WE HAVEN'T ANY POLICIES WE AREN'T THE GOVERNMENT THE PARTY OF CIRCUS CLOWNS AFTER THAT STATEMENT AND THAT CLOWN APPEARS PERMANENTLY ON AFTERNOON BRIEFINGS

Profilbild von Ronan Laverty

Ronan Lavertyvor 3 Jahren

Did Speers ask Sussan about her up coming preselection challenge ? Because if this was the Labor deputy leader facing a preselection challenge it would be front page news

Profilbild von stranger

strangervor 3 Jahren

Yeh he asked if Dutton would step in to ensure she keeps her position like Morrison did when he was PM. She just kept saying she can’t talk the party procedures which are occurring & tried to waffle off and turn it into an attack on Labor.

Profilbild von Pam

Pamvor 3 Jahren

Wow! Deflection and distraction come so easily to her. Sussan chooses to ignore legal advice from the highest level, bc it doesn't suit the LNP nasty negative narrative; a cheerleader for the No vote. Tries to retain some ground by 'leaving it to the people'. Wake up Australia!

Ähnliche Videos

Yesterday, our Judiciary Committee passed HR 38, National Reciprocity. I support this bill, but there is a better option, and it is National Constitutional Carry. 29 states already have Constitutional (i.e. permitless) Carry. Why not extend it to all 50 states? Under HR 38 (Reciprocity), a resident of one of the Constitutional Carry states can carry in any state that allows their citizens to obtain a permit. The recent “Bruen” Supreme Court decision requires all states that aren’t Constitutional Carry to issue carry permits to their citizens. This means that when HR 38 passes, any resident of those 29 Constitutional Carry states will be able to carry in any of the 50 states without a permit. Ironically, however, residents of the 21 states (like New York or California) that aren’t Constitutional Carry will need a permit to carry in their own state, while visitors from states that are Constitutional Carry (like Kentucky or Ohio) won’t need a permit to carry in states like New York or California. If Congress, relying on the Second Amendment, can force California to allow “Permitless” Carry for Kentuckians who visit California, why would we not force California to allow “Permitless” Carry for Californians who are in California? In other words, why not pass National Constitutional Carry and afford everyone in the United States the right to “bear arms” which is enshrined in the Constitution? The other quirk of HR 38 is that (I believe) it would allow a person from Kentucky to carry an AR-15 pistol with a 20-round magazine in California, while Californians would not be allowed to carry, or even own, the same equipment. The Supreme Court decision in “D.C. v. Heller,” whether you agree with it or not, allows states to have some regulations on firearm equipment and eligibility to possess, but HR 38 seems to contradict that framework. Contrast this with my National Constitutional Carry bill which basically says if a state allows people to possess (KEEP) a particular firearm, that state must also allow people to carry (BEAR) that firearm. I introduced my National Constitutional Carry bill in committee yesterday as a substitute amendment to HR 38, National Reciprocity. After introducing the amendment for the record and describing it, I withdrew the amendment instead of putting my Judiciary Committee colleagues in the position of deciding whether to replace National Reciprocity with National Constitutional Carry. The dilemma is that not enough Republicans in the whole House understand the difference, and the prevailing opinion is that Reciprocity can pass the whole House, but Constitutional Carry cannot. Perhaps when more of my colleagues who are not on the Judiciary Committee understand why we should pass National Constitutional Carry instead of (or in addition to) National Reciprocity, we can make a strong push to report National Constitutional Carry out of the Judiciary Committee for a vote in the full House of Representatives. In the meantime, I’m glad HR 38 is going to the House floor for a vote.

Yesterday, our Judiciary Committee passed HR 38, National Reciprocity. I support this bill, but there is a better option, and it is National Constitutional Carry. 29 states already have Constitutional (i.e. permitless) Carry. Why not extend it to all 50 states? Under HR 38 (Reciprocity), a resident of one of the Constitutional Carry states can carry in any state that allows their citizens to obtain a permit. The recent “Bruen” Supreme Court decision requires all states that aren’t Constitutional Carry to issue carry permits to their citizens. This means that when HR 38 passes, any resident of those 29 Constitutional Carry states will be able to carry in any of the 50 states without a permit. Ironically, however, residents of the 21 states (like New York or California) that aren’t Constitutional Carry will need a permit to carry in their own state, while visitors from states that are Constitutional Carry (like Kentucky or Ohio) won’t need a permit to carry in states like New York or California. If Congress, relying on the Second Amendment, can force California to allow “Permitless” Carry for Kentuckians who visit California, why would we not force California to allow “Permitless” Carry for Californians who are in California? In other words, why not pass National Constitutional Carry and afford everyone in the United States the right to “bear arms” which is enshrined in the Constitution? The other quirk of HR 38 is that (I believe) it would allow a person from Kentucky to carry an AR-15 pistol with a 20-round magazine in California, while Californians would not be allowed to carry, or even own, the same equipment. The Supreme Court decision in “D.C. v. Heller,” whether you agree with it or not, allows states to have some regulations on firearm equipment and eligibility to possess, but HR 38 seems to contradict that framework. Contrast this with my National Constitutional Carry bill which basically says if a state allows people to possess (KEEP) a particular firearm, that state must also allow people to carry (BEAR) that firearm. I introduced my National Constitutional Carry bill in committee yesterday as a substitute amendment to HR 38, National Reciprocity. After introducing the amendment for the record and describing it, I withdrew the amendment instead of putting my Judiciary Committee colleagues in the position of deciding whether to replace National Reciprocity with National Constitutional Carry. The dilemma is that not enough Republicans in the whole House understand the difference, and the prevailing opinion is that Reciprocity can pass the whole House, but Constitutional Carry cannot. Perhaps when more of my colleagues who are not on the Judiciary Committee understand why we should pass National Constitutional Carry instead of (or in addition to) National Reciprocity, we can make a strong push to report National Constitutional Carry out of the Judiciary Committee for a vote in the full House of Representatives. In the meantime, I’m glad HR 38 is going to the House floor for a vote.

Thomas Massie

229,372 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Clavicular just PROVED you CAN NOT TRUST everyone’s advice on your body by EXPOSING Liv Schmidt after she wasn’t giving real guidance 😳❤️‍🩹 "She wanted weight loss. It depends how tall you are, but I think you could tone up, especially like the legs." "What are you talking about? You can’t spot reduce fat and like... if someone comes to you and they want weight loss advice, but they are on the verge of death, anorexic, are you going to tell them to lose five or 10 pounds? People can be wrong. It’s your job to correct them." "It’s your job to determine whether or not someone should lose weight. You’re supposed to be the expert if you’re selling some sort of program, but you have no idea what you’re talking about."

Clavicular just PROVED you CAN NOT TRUST everyone’s advice on your body by EXPOSING Liv Schmidt after she wasn’t giving real guidance 😳❤️‍🩹 "She wanted weight loss. It depends how tall you are, but I think you could tone up, especially like the legs." "What are you talking about? You can’t spot reduce fat and like... if someone comes to you and they want weight loss advice, but they are on the verge of death, anorexic, are you going to tell them to lose five or 10 pounds? People can be wrong. It’s your job to correct them." "It’s your job to determine whether or not someone should lose weight. You’re supposed to be the expert if you’re selling some sort of program, but you have no idea what you’re talking about."

midaqih

115,769 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

JasonTheWeen and stableRonaldo talk about how no matter who wins any category of the streamer awards there’s going to be hate and says people who hate on QTCinderella can’t do half of what she does 🫩🥀 “I told her, you just gotta ignore the hate and go off Twitter after the day and be proud of what you created cause people who hate on her wouldn’t take the risk of running a show like that”

JasonTheWeen and stableRonaldo talk about how no matter who wins any category of the streamer awards there’s going to be hate and says people who hate on QTCinderella can’t do half of what she does 🫩🥀 “I told her, you just gotta ignore the hate and go off Twitter after the day and be proud of what you created cause people who hate on her wouldn’t take the risk of running a show like that”

𝕷𝖆𝖒𝖆𝖗⛥

184,114 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

How about all you “AI” experts join Truth Social as your President said to do 4 years ago? The Man posts video after video after video and not a near one of you questioned any of the others I’ve re-posted. Many of you need to be the first on the list for this health discovery… Helps Cognitive Decline. Some of you need multiple truck loads of it. When it doesn’t fit your narrative or tiny “knowledge” pools… It’s “fake, a lie, or AI.” We know who you are. We knew you’d respond that way. That’s why you’re the Target Audience. 🎯

How about all you “AI” experts join Truth Social as your President said to do 4 years ago? The Man posts video after video after video and not a near one of you questioned any of the others I’ve re-posted. Many of you need to be the first on the list for this health discovery… Helps Cognitive Decline. Some of you need multiple truck loads of it. When it doesn’t fit your narrative or tiny “knowledge” pools… It’s “fake, a lie, or AI.” We know who you are. We knew you’d respond that way. That’s why you’re the Target Audience. 🎯

Derek Johnson

63,790 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

🚨 Dropped: ‘We’re Going Broke, Canada’ today, Facts & no filter. A raw, fact-based track calling out the reckless spending, the ignored warnings from real experts, and the mess we’re being left with. This one’s different. Real numbers. Real frustration. Real hope that we can still turn it around. The visuals hit different too 🔥 🎵 Listen + watch the full video now If you’re tired of watching Canada get run into the ground while they keep spending like there’s no tomorrow… Drop a 🔥 Tag someone who needs to hear this And share it. We’re Going Broke, Canada… But we don’t have to stay that way.

🚨 Dropped: ‘We’re Going Broke, Canada’ today, Facts & no filter. A raw, fact-based track calling out the reckless spending, the ignored warnings from real experts, and the mess we’re being left with. This one’s different. Real numbers. Real frustration. Real hope that we can still turn it around. The visuals hit different too 🔥 🎵 Listen + watch the full video now If you’re tired of watching Canada get run into the ground while they keep spending like there’s no tomorrow… Drop a 🔥 Tag someone who needs to hear this And share it. We’re Going Broke, Canada… But we don’t have to stay that way.

Wes Jones

113,110 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

In an interview aired today, Dana Bash became flustered when RFK Jr. argued that constitutional rights must be respected during future epidemics. She first asks what he means, then repeatedly tries to change the subject: “You’re talking about rights, and I’m asking about a potential public health crisis.” Apparently it seems odd to her that constitutional rights would continue to carry any force during a declared public health emergency. RFK Jr. responds by saying, “One of the mistakes we made last time was suppressing those rights so people weren’t being heard. Doctors who were saying, ‘You’re doing it wrong,’ were being marginalized and vilified.” Bash interrupts to reply, “Yeah! Because... because…”, before changing the subject. I really wish she had finished her thought and shared her justification for violating the First Amendment rights of doctors, especially those who have turned out to have been correct. 🤨 Then she becomes visibly angry after RJK accuses her of being part of the problem for “beating up on people who were dissenting.” Bash insists that her primary concern is preventing him from saying things that “aren’t entirely true.” She is totally unwilling to concede any mistakes were made.

In an interview aired today, Dana Bash became flustered when RFK Jr. argued that constitutional rights must be respected during future epidemics. She first asks what he means, then repeatedly tries to change the subject: “You’re talking about rights, and I’m asking about a potential public health crisis.” Apparently it seems odd to her that constitutional rights would continue to carry any force during a declared public health emergency. RFK Jr. responds by saying, “One of the mistakes we made last time was suppressing those rights so people weren’t being heard. Doctors who were saying, ‘You’re doing it wrong,’ were being marginalized and vilified.” Bash interrupts to reply, “Yeah! Because... because…”, before changing the subject. I really wish she had finished her thought and shared her justification for violating the First Amendment rights of doctors, especially those who have turned out to have been correct. 🤨 Then she becomes visibly angry after RJK accuses her of being part of the problem for “beating up on people who were dissenting.” Bash insists that her primary concern is preventing him from saying things that “aren’t entirely true.” She is totally unwilling to concede any mistakes were made.

Laura Powell

24,628 Aufrufe • vor 14 Tagen

Vinod Khosla: “Don’t rely on what the world tells you is possible. Create the world you want.” Vinod points out that in 2010, the Department of Energy projected that there would be 2,305 electric cars on the US market by 2035. In 2014, Tesla alone shipped about 80,000 electric cars. Vinod’s takeaway: “This tells us an important story: they talked to all the experts, and experts only extrapolate the past.” He then shares a few other examples of “experts” who were both overconfident and wrong about the future: • A cartoon from 1889 painting electricity as an existential thread to humans (a narrative that resembles the scaremongering taking place around AI today) • “Lord Calvin, who was president of the Royal Society and maybe the most informed person in science in the early 1900s, said in about 1906 that heavier than air flying machines were impossible, just before the Wright Brothers flew their plane.” • “Fooling around with alternating current is just a waste of time. Nobody will every use it.” — Thomas Edison • “Remote shopping, while entirely feasible, will certainly flop. It has no chance of success.” — Time Magazine He concludes his talk with the following line: “The future belongs to those who dream the dreams & are unreasonable enough to try and make them come true, & who aren’t afraid to fail, & hence take, bold & radical risks.” And he tells the audience: “Don’t rely on experts. Don’t rely on what the world tells you is possible. Create the world you want. I say there’s two types of people: people who extrapolate the past and people who invent the world they want.” Video source: Khosla Ventures (2023)

Vinod Khosla: “Don’t rely on what the world tells you is possible. Create the world you want.” Vinod points out that in 2010, the Department of Energy projected that there would be 2,305 electric cars on the US market by 2035. In 2014, Tesla alone shipped about 80,000 electric cars. Vinod’s takeaway: “This tells us an important story: they talked to all the experts, and experts only extrapolate the past.” He then shares a few other examples of “experts” who were both overconfident and wrong about the future: • A cartoon from 1889 painting electricity as an existential thread to humans (a narrative that resembles the scaremongering taking place around AI today) • “Lord Calvin, who was president of the Royal Society and maybe the most informed person in science in the early 1900s, said in about 1906 that heavier than air flying machines were impossible, just before the Wright Brothers flew their plane.” • “Fooling around with alternating current is just a waste of time. Nobody will every use it.” — Thomas Edison • “Remote shopping, while entirely feasible, will certainly flop. It has no chance of success.” — Time Magazine He concludes his talk with the following line: “The future belongs to those who dream the dreams & are unreasonable enough to try and make them come true, & who aren’t afraid to fail, & hence take, bold & radical risks.” And he tells the audience: “Don’t rely on experts. Don’t rely on what the world tells you is possible. Create the world you want. I say there’s two types of people: people who extrapolate the past and people who invent the world they want.” Video source: Khosla Ventures (2023)

Startup Archive

41,020 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

AGI risk seems lower than it is because the people who know that AGI risk exists are almost all incentivized against talking about it openly. I just made a YouTube video about this that (I think) explains why. Broadly, there are two groups of people not talking about AGI risk: -- People who know AGI risk is real (i.e. AGI lab leaders) -- People who know nothing about AGI risk (i.e. politicians, citizens) To catalyze wide scale discourse about AGI risk, I argue that the following two strategies are strong candidates: 1. [Bottom-Up] Get Citizens Concerned: Find ways to meld AGI risk narratives into legacy media and more understandable political talking points which are already in the Overton window. This work is bound to be messy, and to ultimately soil the core of the message with left-right political gunk, but (barring an AI disaster) its likely the only way that AGI risk catches on with enough of a core base of citizens. As I explain in the video essay, the citizens are the lynchpin to getting everyone (those who don’t know, and those who know) to discuss AGI risk more frankly. 2. [Top-Down] Get a Losing AGI Lab Leader to “Flip”: Those closest to achieving AGI are not going to flip and start talking about AGI risk, the rewards are too great. But those who are losing the race (and don’t want to live to see their rivals achieve the final flex before them) might be able to feign virtue by claiming “Now I see AGI is dangerous, I’m a concerned expert and this needs to be regulated!” They can cloak themselves in pretended virtue while also preventing a rival from crossing the finish line first. I argue that hoping for more Jeff Hintons and Daniel Kokotajlo-like people isn't a good strategy when the incentives are still structured to keep most of them from wanting to talk about it. Here’s the full video essay:

AGI risk seems lower than it is because the people who know that AGI risk exists are almost all incentivized against talking about it openly. I just made a YouTube video about this that (I think) explains why. Broadly, there are two groups of people not talking about AGI risk: -- People who know AGI risk is real (i.e. AGI lab leaders) -- People who know nothing about AGI risk (i.e. politicians, citizens) To catalyze wide scale discourse about AGI risk, I argue that the following two strategies are strong candidates: 1. [Bottom-Up] Get Citizens Concerned: Find ways to meld AGI risk narratives into legacy media and more understandable political talking points which are already in the Overton window. This work is bound to be messy, and to ultimately soil the core of the message with left-right political gunk, but (barring an AI disaster) its likely the only way that AGI risk catches on with enough of a core base of citizens. As I explain in the video essay, the citizens are the lynchpin to getting everyone (those who don’t know, and those who know) to discuss AGI risk more frankly. 2. [Top-Down] Get a Losing AGI Lab Leader to “Flip”: Those closest to achieving AGI are not going to flip and start talking about AGI risk, the rewards are too great. But those who are losing the race (and don’t want to live to see their rivals achieve the final flex before them) might be able to feign virtue by claiming “Now I see AGI is dangerous, I’m a concerned expert and this needs to be regulated!” They can cloak themselves in pretended virtue while also preventing a rival from crossing the finish line first. I argue that hoping for more Jeff Hintons and Daniel Kokotajlo-like people isn't a good strategy when the incentives are still structured to keep most of them from wanting to talk about it. Here’s the full video essay:

Daniel Faggella

26,975 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

CNN’s Shermichael Singleton Singleton on last night’s NYC mayoral debate and whether Andrew Cuomo did anything to change the trajectory of the race and a Mamdani victory: “No...I think it’s going to be Mamdani. He’s incredibly talented. As a Republican, I certainly don’t agree with many of his positions. But there is something to be said about the arguments that he’s making to New Yorkers that is palatable. I am concerned about some of his presentations on economics. I’m concerned about the idea of the role of government as it pertains to sort of level setting for people who have economically struggled. I think there’s a different way to go about certain things, but that message is resonating. And if you’re Cuomo, can folks in New York know who Cuomo is? And there’s some real concern about his past misgivings, there’s some concern about some of the things he did as governor. And he didn’t, in my opinion, effectively address those things aggressively enough. Mamdani did. He showcased strength. And even if you’re a New Yorker, you’re curious and maybe say, I don’t disagree with him. You watch that and say, this is a guy who will fight for me, and that moves the needle for voters.”

CNN’s Shermichael Singleton Singleton on last night’s NYC mayoral debate and whether Andrew Cuomo did anything to change the trajectory of the race and a Mamdani victory: “No...I think it’s going to be Mamdani. He’s incredibly talented. As a Republican, I certainly don’t agree with many of his positions. But there is something to be said about the arguments that he’s making to New Yorkers that is palatable. I am concerned about some of his presentations on economics. I’m concerned about the idea of the role of government as it pertains to sort of level setting for people who have economically struggled. I think there’s a different way to go about certain things, but that message is resonating. And if you’re Cuomo, can folks in New York know who Cuomo is? And there’s some real concern about his past misgivings, there’s some concern about some of the things he did as governor. And he didn’t, in my opinion, effectively address those things aggressively enough. Mamdani did. He showcased strength. And even if you’re a New Yorker, you’re curious and maybe say, I don’t disagree with him. You watch that and say, this is a guy who will fight for me, and that moves the needle for voters.”

Curtis Houck

10,567 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

They Really Expect You To Believe, With Everything Going On In The World, That Poland Just Now Decided To Vote Left For The WEF… THIS IS POLAND: “Thank you Mr, President. Dear Leftists, let me give you some example of major democracy in Poland. — Polish Nation rejected you dear Leftists 8 TIMES, 8 time in a row you have lost elections in Poland so get used to it because you’re going to lose again” “Let me give you some facts about Democracy in Poland The lowest unemployment One of the highest GDPs after Covid 19 One of the lowest debts So don’t give us this RUBBISH about the need of this immigration. — There is no illegal migration in Poland” YOU MUST LISTEN TO THIS WHOLE SPEECH!

They Really Expect You To Believe, With Everything Going On In The World, That Poland Just Now Decided To Vote Left For The WEF… THIS IS POLAND: “Thank you Mr, President. Dear Leftists, let me give you some example of major democracy in Poland. — Polish Nation rejected you dear Leftists 8 TIMES, 8 time in a row you have lost elections in Poland so get used to it because you’re going to lose again” “Let me give you some facts about Democracy in Poland The lowest unemployment One of the highest GDPs after Covid 19 One of the lowest debts So don’t give us this RUBBISH about the need of this immigration. — There is no illegal migration in Poland” YOU MUST LISTEN TO THIS WHOLE SPEECH!

Wall Street Apes

801,553 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Kareem believes capitalism rewards risk more than hard work or skill. He has a really unique way of defining risk and explains why most people never actually take any: "Capitalism rewards risk more than anything else. A lot of people think it's a meritocracy, but there are a lot of people working really hard and not making a lot of money. It doesn't just reward skill either. You can be eating a sword and not making as much as someone doing a YouTube video. A lot of people think they're taking risks, but aren't taking real risks. I talked to one founder who went to a good school, then YC, and he was telling me about his company. He said, 'We serve sales, and we serve recruiting.' I said, 'You have to pick one.' That's where you're actually providing value –– in committing yourself to serving some group of people in some specific way. My definition of risk is you need to genuinely not know what's going to happen, so you're going to discover something new. And it needs to be coupled with a high potential for shame. That's when you can take real risk. When you couple risk and courage, the next part is commitment. You actually need to follow through to see what ends up happening. You can't just quit in the beginning."

Kareem believes capitalism rewards risk more than hard work or skill. He has a really unique way of defining risk and explains why most people never actually take any: "Capitalism rewards risk more than anything else. A lot of people think it's a meritocracy, but there are a lot of people working really hard and not making a lot of money. It doesn't just reward skill either. You can be eating a sword and not making as much as someone doing a YouTube video. A lot of people think they're taking risks, but aren't taking real risks. I talked to one founder who went to a good school, then YC, and he was telling me about his company. He said, 'We serve sales, and we serve recruiting.' I said, 'You have to pick one.' That's where you're actually providing value –– in committing yourself to serving some group of people in some specific way. My definition of risk is you need to genuinely not know what's going to happen, so you're going to discover something new. And it needs to be coupled with a high potential for shame. That's when you can take real risk. When you couple risk and courage, the next part is commitment. You actually need to follow through to see what ends up happening. You can't just quit in the beginning."

Patrick OShaughnessy

96,049 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Palmer Luckey’s advice for founder-led communications “My advice to people would probably be to recognize that the value of your reputation is very high,” Anduril founder Palmer Luckey begins. “If people do not trust you; if they do not believe in what you’re saying; if they do not think that you’re a person worth listening to, they’re going to have a hard time working with you.” Palmer also argues that founders don’t need to be neutral: “You don’t need to be neutral. You can be a propagandist. You can advocate for a particular point of view . . . In general, people should recognize that if you say something where you caveat it and hedge it and basically end up saying something that most people would agree with, you might as well have said nothing at all.” He continues: “You are not going to build a following of people who say, ‘I just love Palmer’s right-down-the-middle, very-hedged takes that everyone agrees with.’ If you’re just restating common sentiment, it’s not going to get you anywhere . . . So one of the things I tell people is, ‘Make sure that when you’re saying something, you’re SAYING something. Make sure you’re trying to persuade and affect change.’ — maybe not in everybody, but in some people. If you make some people love what you’re saying and some people hate what you’re saying, that’s a lot better than having everybody lukewarm agree with you. Don’t waste your time communicating about the things everyone already agrees with you on. Focus on the things where you need to change their mind.” Source: Lulu Cheng Meservey (Sep 2025)

Palmer Luckey’s advice for founder-led communications “My advice to people would probably be to recognize that the value of your reputation is very high,” Anduril founder Palmer Luckey begins. “If people do not trust you; if they do not believe in what you’re saying; if they do not think that you’re a person worth listening to, they’re going to have a hard time working with you.” Palmer also argues that founders don’t need to be neutral: “You don’t need to be neutral. You can be a propagandist. You can advocate for a particular point of view . . . In general, people should recognize that if you say something where you caveat it and hedge it and basically end up saying something that most people would agree with, you might as well have said nothing at all.” He continues: “You are not going to build a following of people who say, ‘I just love Palmer’s right-down-the-middle, very-hedged takes that everyone agrees with.’ If you’re just restating common sentiment, it’s not going to get you anywhere . . . So one of the things I tell people is, ‘Make sure that when you’re saying something, you’re SAYING something. Make sure you’re trying to persuade and affect change.’ — maybe not in everybody, but in some people. If you make some people love what you’re saying and some people hate what you’re saying, that’s a lot better than having everybody lukewarm agree with you. Don’t waste your time communicating about the things everyone already agrees with you on. Focus on the things where you need to change their mind.” Source: Lulu Cheng Meservey (Sep 2025)

Startup Archive

78,576 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

AIR JORDAN 4 “MILITARY BLUE” SKU: FV5029-141 PRICE: $215 DROP: May 4 📈📈 - STOCK ~40,000 Ok, let’s talk about these and make a gameplan for Saturday. First off, yes I know I’m the one who put out 1.2 million pairs and that was in fact wrong. I’ve don’t my best to recant that statement but I still see it floating around. There’s been lots of changes in the stock world and I’ll explain it all in a Twitter space soon. As it stands now if you don’t have a pair secured by now you’re going to have to empty the tool box. With ~40,00 pairs (+/- a few thousand pairs) these are going to be hard to cop on drop day. There’s not much time left between now and drop day so I don’t expect to see much change in stock but I’m watching closely and will for sure post any updates. EA for JD has come and gone, raffles are still on-going with Ws starting to roll out now. On Saturday your best chances to cop are going to be SNKRS, Snipes, and DTLR in my opinion. Check out Supply for a detailed list of what stores are actually releasing on Saturday and see if any raffles are still ongoing. You’re going to have to call in some favors and ask for some help but hopefully you can still cop. Good luck yall, hit me up if you have any questions or need advice.

AIR JORDAN 4 “MILITARY BLUE” SKU: FV5029-141 PRICE: $215 DROP: May 4 📈📈 - STOCK ~40,000 Ok, let’s talk about these and make a gameplan for Saturday. First off, yes I know I’m the one who put out 1.2 million pairs and that was in fact wrong. I’ve don’t my best to recant that statement but I still see it floating around. There’s been lots of changes in the stock world and I’ll explain it all in a Twitter space soon. As it stands now if you don’t have a pair secured by now you’re going to have to empty the tool box. With ~40,00 pairs (+/- a few thousand pairs) these are going to be hard to cop on drop day. There’s not much time left between now and drop day so I don’t expect to see much change in stock but I’m watching closely and will for sure post any updates. EA for JD has come and gone, raffles are still on-going with Ws starting to roll out now. On Saturday your best chances to cop are going to be SNKRS, Snipes, and DTLR in my opinion. Check out Supply for a detailed list of what stores are actually releasing on Saturday and see if any raffles are still ongoing. You’re going to have to call in some favors and ask for some help but hopefully you can still cop. Good luck yall, hit me up if you have any questions or need advice.

UncleChrissy

97,704 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Same anchor. Same chair. Two interviews. Interview 1 — Kanhaiya Kumar mentions RSS & Godse on live TV. Megha Prasad LOSES IT. Interrupts. Argues. Loses her journalist “neutrality” in 10 seconds flat. Interview 2 — Himanta Biswa Sarma calls the constitutional Leader of Opposition of India a “पूरा पागल” on live national TV. Megha Prasad? She. Laughs. Same mouth. Same chair. Same show. Two completely different Meghas. One Megha who can’t hear a historical fact about RSS without going to war. One Megha who giggles like it’s a comedy show when the LoP is publicly humiliated. This is not bias anymore. This is a declaration. Journalists like this aren’t just a disgrace to ABP, they are a disgrace to every Indian who still believes the press is supposed to hold power accountable, NOT protect it. You don’t get to call yourself a journalist when you fight guests who question the ruling party’s ideology, but laugh when the Opposition leader is abused on YOUR show, on YOUR watch, in YOUR chair. That’s not journalism. That’s a PR job with a microphone. ABP News, your anchor laughed at the abuse of a constitutional post-holder on live TV. What action are you taking? Or is the silence also part of the package?

Same anchor. Same chair. Two interviews. Interview 1 — Kanhaiya Kumar mentions RSS & Godse on live TV. Megha Prasad LOSES IT. Interrupts. Argues. Loses her journalist “neutrality” in 10 seconds flat. Interview 2 — Himanta Biswa Sarma calls the constitutional Leader of Opposition of India a “पूरा पागल” on live national TV. Megha Prasad? She. Laughs. Same mouth. Same chair. Same show. Two completely different Meghas. One Megha who can’t hear a historical fact about RSS without going to war. One Megha who giggles like it’s a comedy show when the LoP is publicly humiliated. This is not bias anymore. This is a declaration. Journalists like this aren’t just a disgrace to ABP, they are a disgrace to every Indian who still believes the press is supposed to hold power accountable, NOT protect it. You don’t get to call yourself a journalist when you fight guests who question the ruling party’s ideology, but laugh when the Opposition leader is abused on YOUR show, on YOUR watch, in YOUR chair. That’s not journalism. That’s a PR job with a microphone. ABP News, your anchor laughed at the abuse of a constitutional post-holder on live TV. What action are you taking? Or is the silence also part of the package?

Sincere Dibya

82,947 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

🚨 I AM PISSED OFF! BREAKING: The same Democrats who were SILENT during 179 Iranian terror attacks… I AM PISSED OFF! …who said NOTHING during Benghazi… …who applauded Obama’s 26,000 unauthorized drone strikes… …who shrugged when Biden gifted the Taliban $85 billion in U.S. weapons… are now suddenly constitutional experts because Trump bombed 3 Iranian nuclear sites? Oh please. Shut your lying Democrat mouth. Let me guess—now you care about “congressional approval”? Now you care about “American lives”? Now you’re the party of restraint? 🥴 Sit down, Bernie. 📜 Put the pocket Constitution away, Hakeem. 🧼 Wipe the Benghazi blood off your hands before lecturing us. You weren’t worried about foreign aggression… You were worried Trump did something effective… and didn’t ask your weak little permission slips. These statements are cornier than a Vermont granola bar. The truth? 👀 You can’t trust a Democrat with national security. 👀 You can’t trust a Democrat with borders. 👀 You can’t even trust a Democrat with pronouns. But you’re supposed to believe they suddenly care about Iran? Nah. They’re just mad Trump did what Biden was too scared to do.

🚨 I AM PISSED OFF! BREAKING: The same Democrats who were SILENT during 179 Iranian terror attacks… I AM PISSED OFF! …who said NOTHING during Benghazi… …who applauded Obama’s 26,000 unauthorized drone strikes… …who shrugged when Biden gifted the Taliban $85 billion in U.S. weapons… are now suddenly constitutional experts because Trump bombed 3 Iranian nuclear sites? Oh please. Shut your lying Democrat mouth. Let me guess—now you care about “congressional approval”? Now you care about “American lives”? Now you’re the party of restraint? 🥴 Sit down, Bernie. 📜 Put the pocket Constitution away, Hakeem. 🧼 Wipe the Benghazi blood off your hands before lecturing us. You weren’t worried about foreign aggression… You were worried Trump did something effective… and didn’t ask your weak little permission slips. These statements are cornier than a Vermont granola bar. The truth? 👀 You can’t trust a Democrat with national security. 👀 You can’t trust a Democrat with borders. 👀 You can’t even trust a Democrat with pronouns. But you’re supposed to believe they suddenly care about Iran? Nah. They’re just mad Trump did what Biden was too scared to do.

A Gene Robinson

60,654 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

⛔️This is the type of gatekeeping ritual abuse, mind control, and organized abuse survivors have to face everyday: Podcast hosts and podcasts like with massive platforms who invite ‘experts’ to speak on behalf of survivors who have clearly never even once spoken to a single survivor or witness of the topic they are ‘expertly’ lecturing on (MK ULTRA) and who call the abuse survivors they are speaking for ‘goons’, and further gaslight them by saying their very real (and proven) experiences and memories of abuse are ‘fake’ and made up. It’s disgusting that so many large platforms and ‘experts’ are profiting off the backs of survivors, whistleblowers and children while actual survivors and whistleblowers who are speaking out are being silenced, targeted, ignored, losing their livelihoods, and taking their own lives. Julian - I’ve interviewed more survivors of these heinous abuses and crimes (that you openly mocked) than anyone else in the world. HUNDREDS of them. You’re telling me that hundreds and thousands of people (strangers) from all over the world with the exact same memories, abusers, abuse locations, types of abuse / torture, and testimonies are all lying? All of them? But your one ‘expert’ guest who has never talked to a survivor is the only one telling the truth? How and why do you think you and this guest get to speak on behalf of victims and survivors? Why don’t you invite real experts on - like survivors of MK ULTRA or people who work directly with survivors who can educate you and your audience? Maybe you should listen to my podcast and listen to real survivors before opening your mouth. By ignoring actual survivors and using your show to gaslight, discredit and profit off them with ignorant guests, you are willingly making yourself complicit in the systemic coverup of the worst crimes against humanity ever committed in history and revealing yourself and this ‘expert’ as limited hangout gatekeepers. It’s you who is muddying the waters, Julian.

⛔️This is the type of gatekeeping ritual abuse, mind control, and organized abuse survivors have to face everyday: Podcast hosts and podcasts like with massive platforms who invite ‘experts’ to speak on behalf of survivors who have clearly never even once spoken to a single survivor or witness of the topic they are ‘expertly’ lecturing on (MK ULTRA) and who call the abuse survivors they are speaking for ‘goons’, and further gaslight them by saying their very real (and proven) experiences and memories of abuse are ‘fake’ and made up. It’s disgusting that so many large platforms and ‘experts’ are profiting off the backs of survivors, whistleblowers and children while actual survivors and whistleblowers who are speaking out are being silenced, targeted, ignored, losing their livelihoods, and taking their own lives. Julian - I’ve interviewed more survivors of these heinous abuses and crimes (that you openly mocked) than anyone else in the world. HUNDREDS of them. You’re telling me that hundreds and thousands of people (strangers) from all over the world with the exact same memories, abusers, abuse locations, types of abuse / torture, and testimonies are all lying? All of them? But your one ‘expert’ guest who has never talked to a survivor is the only one telling the truth? How and why do you think you and this guest get to speak on behalf of victims and survivors? Why don’t you invite real experts on - like survivors of MK ULTRA or people who work directly with survivors who can educate you and your audience? Maybe you should listen to my podcast and listen to real survivors before opening your mouth. By ignoring actual survivors and using your show to gaslight, discredit and profit off them with ignorant guests, you are willingly making yourself complicit in the systemic coverup of the worst crimes against humanity ever committed in history and revealing yourself and this ‘expert’ as limited hangout gatekeepers. It’s you who is muddying the waters, Julian.

E M M A ✨ K A T H E R I N E

53,990 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Wardrobe CONFRONTS Ojay for being disrespectful to his roommate Plaqueboymax and calling him a “Demon” & “Sellout” for painting his nails & getting a “Diva” Tattoo 😳 Wardrobe found out Max got emotional & ended his stream after Ojay’s comments so he instantly left his dorm to stand up for him ❤️ “If you got a problem, keep it to yourself boo… What the f*ck do nails being painted have to do with you talking about the devil?… You gotta put on a wack a** fit to get attention. You gotta bully others to get attention. Nobody looks at you because nobody knows who the f*ck you are boo… You’re the actual devil b*tch. Get the f*ck out my face.”

Wardrobe CONFRONTS Ojay for being disrespectful to his roommate Plaqueboymax and calling him a “Demon” & “Sellout” for painting his nails & getting a “Diva” Tattoo 😳 Wardrobe found out Max got emotional & ended his stream after Ojay’s comments so he instantly left his dorm to stand up for him ❤️ “If you got a problem, keep it to yourself boo… What the f*ck do nails being painted have to do with you talking about the devil?… You gotta put on a wack a** fit to get attention. You gotta bully others to get attention. Nobody looks at you because nobody knows who the fck you are boo… You’re the actual devil btch. Get the f*ck out my face.”

Slime🐍

206,532 Aufrufe • vor 29 Tagen

Europe just banned gel nail polish. The highly popular product is worshipped for its ability to create a long-lasting, no-chip manicure. It boasted a market value of nearly $6 billion in 2024. But the EU banned one of its key ingredients, trimethylbenzoyl diphenylphosphine oxide (or TPO), after it was classified as “carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic-to-reproduction" substance. The EU cited studies that found animals experienced fertility and reproductive health issues after ingesting high levels of TPO. But people getting a gel manicure don’t ingest TPO, putting them at minimal risk of harmful effects, experts told PBS News. Why isn’t this banned in the U.S.? EU standards take a hazard-based approach, looking at the intrinsic harm of a chemical or product in isolation. The U.S. takes a risk-based approach, taking into account both the risk and exposure, experts said. What does this mean for you? Michelle Wong, a chemistry P.h.D and science communicator at Lab Muffin Beauty Science, told PBS News that 1% of TPO is left after curing and if you go into the sun afterwards, the TPO is going to be gone altogether. But there are risks with at-home gel nail kits, including painting outside of your nails or not curing the paint correctly.

Europe just banned gel nail polish. The highly popular product is worshipped for its ability to create a long-lasting, no-chip manicure. It boasted a market value of nearly $6 billion in 2024. But the EU banned one of its key ingredients, trimethylbenzoyl diphenylphosphine oxide (or TPO), after it was classified as “carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic-to-reproduction" substance. The EU cited studies that found animals experienced fertility and reproductive health issues after ingesting high levels of TPO. But people getting a gel manicure don’t ingest TPO, putting them at minimal risk of harmful effects, experts told PBS News. Why isn’t this banned in the U.S.? EU standards take a hazard-based approach, looking at the intrinsic harm of a chemical or product in isolation. The U.S. takes a risk-based approach, taking into account both the risk and exposure, experts said. What does this mean for you? Michelle Wong, a chemistry P.h.D and science communicator at Lab Muffin Beauty Science, told PBS News that 1% of TPO is left after curing and if you go into the sun afterwards, the TPO is going to be gone altogether. But there are risks with at-home gel nail kits, including painting outside of your nails or not curing the paint correctly.

PBS News

20,059 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

Pritzker: The decision by the Supreme Court today on the Voting Rights Act is an abomination. It is an attack on a crown jewel of our democracy. Illinois is the proud home to having sent more black congresspeople to Washington than any other state in the country. The decision that was made today by SCOTUS about the Voting Rights Act is an attack on minorities across this country. We're not going to stand for it in Illinois. We're going to push back. We have options for pushing back. And that is under discussion with the legislature even today. I talked to lawyers this morning, people who are experts in this, who've said that everything that we have in Illinois now is constitutional, even under the new ruling. I'm sure there will be people who try to attack it. But the reality is that if you read through the Supreme Court decision, I'm told that it validates the maps that are already in place. And of course, we'll be looking at a new remap in Illinois in 2031.

Pritzker: The decision by the Supreme Court today on the Voting Rights Act is an abomination. It is an attack on a crown jewel of our democracy. Illinois is the proud home to having sent more black congresspeople to Washington than any other state in the country. The decision that was made today by SCOTUS about the Voting Rights Act is an attack on minorities across this country. We're not going to stand for it in Illinois. We're going to push back. We have options for pushing back. And that is under discussion with the legislature even today. I talked to lawyers this morning, people who are experts in this, who've said that everything that we have in Illinois now is constitutional, even under the new ruling. I'm sure there will be people who try to attack it. But the reality is that if you read through the Supreme Court decision, I'm told that it validates the maps that are already in place. And of course, we'll be looking at a new remap in Illinois in 2031.

MeidasTouch

146,387 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten