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。

Tech founders tell your kids to code. They raise theirs on philosophy. Brené Brown caught the exact contradiction in the rooms she sits in. The same person who recommends physics and code five minutes later points to deep reading of history and the Stoics as the real edge. Steve... Jobs made it concrete: no iPads at his dinner table, just conversation about art and ideas. That gap matters because it hints at a quiet split. One group gets trained for the tools. Another gets trained for the questions the tools can’t answer. Raising children with almost no technology forces slower conversations, longer stretches of boredom, and real attention to the people in the room. It is harder in the moment and clearer in the long run.show more

Camus

463,084 subscribers

43,457 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Brené Brown shares what terrifies her most about the tech elite "I'm in rooms with the people who run these platforms and own the companies. I hear one billionaire say: 'My kids should study coding and physics — that's the future.' Five minutes later, the same person says: 'My success comes from deep reading of philosophy and the Stoics.' Which is it? It feels like there's an emerging thinking class: they get philosophy, liberal arts, history... while the rest of us just keep scrolling. Steve Jobs said his kids didn't have iPads. His family confirmed: no tech at dinner — they talked about art and history." The divide is real — and it's growing. 1:35 clip inside — sobering observation.

Brené Brown shares what terrifies her most about the tech elite "I'm in rooms with the people who run these platforms and own the companies. I hear one billionaire say: 'My kids should study coding and physics — that's the future.' Five minutes later, the same person says: 'My success comes from deep reading of philosophy and the Stoics.' Which is it? It feels like there's an emerging thinking class: they get philosophy, liberal arts, history... while the rest of us just keep scrolling. Steve Jobs said his kids didn't have iPads. His family confirmed: no tech at dinner — they talked about art and history." The divide is real — and it's growing. 1:35 clip inside — sobering observation.

Camus

218,776 次观看 • 9 个月前

Brené Brown, researcher and author, on the contradiction she keeps hearing in rooms full of tech billionaires: Her work puts her in rooms where the founders and CEOs of major tech platforms talk openly about how they think. What Brené Brown hears there unsettles her: "So I hear someone say, 'Hey, you know, tech billionaire, what should my kids study? I'm worried for my kids… they should study coding, physics,' and then five minutes later, as if that answer didn't happen, someone will say, 'What do you attribute your success to?' I mean deeply when you think about it, and the same person will say, 'My deep reading of philosophy and the stoics.'" The contradiction is what stops her: the same people crediting philosophy and the liberal arts for their own success are telling other parents their kids should focus on coding and physics. That gap leads her to a bigger, more uncomfortable question: "I start to extrapolate from there and wonder if there is a thinking class that's emerging where they're like, 'We're going to read philosophy and we're going to read the liberal arts and we're going to study history, and the rest of you just keep scrolling. Don't worry about the big words. We'll handle all the big words for you.'" She points to Steve Jobs as an early signal of the same pattern: "It's like when they asked Steve Jobs, 'Boy, your kids must love the iPad.' Steve Jobs said, 'My kids don't have an iPad.' And then his biographer who spent time with his family said he wasn't kidding. There's no technology. At dinner, they're talking about art and history." The takeaway is simple but uncomfortable. The people building these platforms are protecting their own kids from them, and giving them books, ideas, and real conversation instead. So why are the rest of us being sold something different?

Brené Brown, researcher and author, on the contradiction she keeps hearing in rooms full of tech billionaires: Her work puts her in rooms where the founders and CEOs of major tech platforms talk openly about how they think. What Brené Brown hears there unsettles her: "So I hear someone say, 'Hey, you know, tech billionaire, what should my kids study? I'm worried for my kids… they should study coding, physics,' and then five minutes later, as if that answer didn't happen, someone will say, 'What do you attribute your success to?' I mean deeply when you think about it, and the same person will say, 'My deep reading of philosophy and the stoics.'" The contradiction is what stops her: the same people crediting philosophy and the liberal arts for their own success are telling other parents their kids should focus on coding and physics. That gap leads her to a bigger, more uncomfortable question: "I start to extrapolate from there and wonder if there is a thinking class that's emerging where they're like, 'We're going to read philosophy and we're going to read the liberal arts and we're going to study history, and the rest of you just keep scrolling. Don't worry about the big words. We'll handle all the big words for you.'" She points to Steve Jobs as an early signal of the same pattern: "It's like when they asked Steve Jobs, 'Boy, your kids must love the iPad.' Steve Jobs said, 'My kids don't have an iPad.' And then his biographer who spent time with his family said he wasn't kidding. There's no technology. At dinner, they're talking about art and history." The takeaway is simple but uncomfortable. The people building these platforms are protecting their own kids from them, and giving them books, ideas, and real conversation instead. So why are the rest of us being sold something different?

Big Brain Business

265,012 次观看 • 4 个月前

Steve Jobs famously said his kids didn’t use iPads. Brené Brown highlighted this on Steven Bartlett’s Diary of a CEO. She’s been in rooms with tech billionaires and platform founders. When they’re asked what kids should study today, the answer is coding and physics. But when the same people reflect on their own success? They credit deep reading of philosophy, the Stoics, history, and the liberal arts. Her concern: a quiet divide is forming — one group protecting deep thinking for their own children while the rest of us are encouraged to just keep scrolling. In the age of AI, experts across the board are saying critical thinking, philosophical reasoning, and liberal arts skills are becoming even more essential — not less. AI can generate answers, but it can’t replace the human ability to ask the right questions, understand context, ethics, and meaning. The people building our digital future seem to understand this deeply for their own families, yet design systems that often pull everyone else in the opposite direction. Do you think we’re creating a two-tier system — deep thinkers at the top and scrollers below?

Steve Jobs famously said his kids didn’t use iPads. Brené Brown highlighted this on Steven Bartlett’s Diary of a CEO. She’s been in rooms with tech billionaires and platform founders. When they’re asked what kids should study today, the answer is coding and physics. But when the same people reflect on their own success? They credit deep reading of philosophy, the Stoics, history, and the liberal arts. Her concern: a quiet divide is forming — one group protecting deep thinking for their own children while the rest of us are encouraged to just keep scrolling. In the age of AI, experts across the board are saying critical thinking, philosophical reasoning, and liberal arts skills are becoming even more essential — not less. AI can generate answers, but it can’t replace the human ability to ask the right questions, understand context, ethics, and meaning. The people building our digital future seem to understand this deeply for their own families, yet design systems that often pull everyone else in the opposite direction. Do you think we’re creating a two-tier system — deep thinkers at the top and scrollers below?

Camus

191,348 次观看 • 4 个月前

EVERY GIRL IN THIS LINE HAS A NUMBER PINNED TO HER DRESS. ONE ROOM, ONE NIGHT, ONE TABLE EACH. A FOLDER ON A LAPTOP RUNS THE IDENTICAL BUSINESS WITH NO ROOM AND NO CEILING. HERE IS THE ENGINE. the number is the tell. she is not being introduced, she is being indexed. you pick by digit. and this room has physics. one girl sits at one table. the venue holds what it holds. the night ends at 2am. the model caps out and everybody in it knows the number. the persona build sells the exact same thing and deletes all three limits. one character, three thousand simultaneous conversations, no shift, no travel, no room. nothing about the mechanic changed. scarcity, selection, attention that stops the moment you stop paying. ai did not invent any of that. it removed the walls. and here is the part operators actually copy from rooms like this. never present one option. present a row. the choosing is the product. that is why persona accounts post the same girl in four different looks and ask which one, and why the comment section does the selling for them. the room caps at twenty girls and one night. the folder does not cap at all. full template in the article below. 5 phases, every setting, every number.

Sensitive content

EVERY GIRL IN THIS LINE HAS A NUMBER PINNED TO HER DRESS. ONE ROOM, ONE NIGHT, ONE TABLE EACH. A FOLDER ON A LAPTOP RUNS THE IDENTICAL BUSINESS WITH NO ROOM AND NO CEILING. HERE IS THE ENGINE. the number is the tell. she is not being introduced, she is being indexed. you pick by digit. and this room has physics. one girl sits at one table. the venue holds what it holds. the night ends at 2am. the model caps out and everybody in it knows the number. the persona build sells the exact same thing and deletes all three limits. one character, three thousand simultaneous conversations, no shift, no travel, no room. nothing about the mechanic changed. scarcity, selection, attention that stops the moment you stop paying. ai did not invent any of that. it removed the walls. and here is the part operators actually copy from rooms like this. never present one option. present a row. the choosing is the product. that is why persona accounts post the same girl in four different looks and ask which one, and why the comment section does the selling for them. the room caps at twenty girls and one night. the folder does not cap at all. full template in the article below. 5 phases, every setting, every number.

CRYPTANSKY

2,785,787 次观看 • 1 个月前

I just caught this CBC segment addressing youth unemployment rates and tying it to boomers who won’t retire and clear room for the younger generations. If you’ve been following me I have said the same thing and I can’t believe the CBC sounds like me now. Boomers were hired out of high school and trained on the job then artificially created job security by developing the Human Resources Industrial Complex which made the exact same careers harder and harder to achieve with more regulations, more education, and more certifications. There are almost zero entry level jobs for Gen Z in order to build a resume with experience and references to move up in the world. Boomers need to get out of the way already. They predominantly voted for the policies that created the cost of living crisis. They need to own it and live in it.

I just caught this CBC segment addressing youth unemployment rates and tying it to boomers who won’t retire and clear room for the younger generations. If you’ve been following me I have said the same thing and I can’t believe the CBC sounds like me now. Boomers were hired out of high school and trained on the job then artificially created job security by developing the Human Resources Industrial Complex which made the exact same careers harder and harder to achieve with more regulations, more education, and more certifications. There are almost zero entry level jobs for Gen Z in order to build a resume with experience and references to move up in the world. Boomers need to get out of the way already. They predominantly voted for the policies that created the cost of living crisis. They need to own it and live in it.

Millennial Grump

168,050 次观看 • 1 年前

A man who went to prison for talking people out of their money filmed himself doing it live, then sold the method as a course. 7 million people have watched him work. The man is Jordan Belfort. The film about him made him famous. What almost nobody has done is watch the real one, on camera, running the actual technique on a real prospect for 22 minutes with no script and no edit. And the way he does it is the reason to watch. He barely talks about the product. The first minutes are almost entirely questions, and every answer gets used against the person later in his own words. He is not persuading. He is collecting. Then the phrase the comments turned into a meme. He ends his key sentences with four words that make agreement feel like the neutral option and refusal feel like rudeness. Once you notice it, you cannot unhear it, and you will catch it in the next call you take. One viewer broke the whole method into 9 steps in a comment. It got 12 thousand likes, which tells you people are studying this video like a manual. Here is the uncomfortable part. Every technique in it is ordinary sales advice: listen, mirror, remove friction, set expectations. That is exactly what makes it worth studying. The tools were never the crime. The intent was. Learn what is being done to you and it stops working on you. That is the only defense there is. 22 minutes. No script. It is in the video.

A man who went to prison for talking people out of their money filmed himself doing it live, then sold the method as a course. 7 million people have watched him work. The man is Jordan Belfort. The film about him made him famous. What almost nobody has done is watch the real one, on camera, running the actual technique on a real prospect for 22 minutes with no script and no edit. And the way he does it is the reason to watch. He barely talks about the product. The first minutes are almost entirely questions, and every answer gets used against the person later in his own words. He is not persuading. He is collecting. Then the phrase the comments turned into a meme. He ends his key sentences with four words that make agreement feel like the neutral option and refusal feel like rudeness. Once you notice it, you cannot unhear it, and you will catch it in the next call you take. One viewer broke the whole method into 9 steps in a comment. It got 12 thousand likes, which tells you people are studying this video like a manual. Here is the uncomfortable part. Every technique in it is ordinary sales advice: listen, mirror, remove friction, set expectations. That is exactly what makes it worth studying. The tools were never the crime. The intent was. Learn what is being done to you and it stops working on you. That is the only defense there is. 22 minutes. No script. It is in the video.

Silverhand

1,521,131 次观看 • 1 个月前

Steve Jobs explains why it's dangerous for sales and marketing people to run tech companies: Jobs starts with PepsiCo and John Sculley: "At PepsiCo, they at most would change their product once every 10 years. To them, a new product was like a new-size bottle." In that world, sales and marketing people drove success and ran the company. For PepsiCo, that worked. But Jobs warns about what happens in tech: "The same thing can happen in technology companies that get monopolies like IBM and Xerox. When you have a monopoly market share, sales and marketing people end up running the companies." The danger? "The product people get driven out of the decision-making forums and the companies forget what it means to make great products. The product genius that brought them to that monopolistic position gets rotted out by people who have no conception of a good product versus a bad product, no conception of the craftsmanship required to turn a good idea into a good product, and no feeling in their hearts about wanting to really help the customers." Jobs uses Xerox as his cautionary tale, where marketing executives had "no clue" about the revolutionary technology they owned: "They grabbed defeat from the greatest victory in the computer industry. Xerox could have been the IBM of the '90s. Could have been the Microsoft of the '90s." The bottom line: Jobs argues that sales and marketing people can run companies where products don't change. But in technology, they'll hurt what made the company great.

Steve Jobs explains why it's dangerous for sales and marketing people to run tech companies: Jobs starts with PepsiCo and John Sculley: "At PepsiCo, they at most would change their product once every 10 years. To them, a new product was like a new-size bottle." In that world, sales and marketing people drove success and ran the company. For PepsiCo, that worked. But Jobs warns about what happens in tech: "The same thing can happen in technology companies that get monopolies like IBM and Xerox. When you have a monopoly market share, sales and marketing people end up running the companies." The danger? "The product people get driven out of the decision-making forums and the companies forget what it means to make great products. The product genius that brought them to that monopolistic position gets rotted out by people who have no conception of a good product versus a bad product, no conception of the craftsmanship required to turn a good idea into a good product, and no feeling in their hearts about wanting to really help the customers." Jobs uses Xerox as his cautionary tale, where marketing executives had "no clue" about the revolutionary technology they owned: "They grabbed defeat from the greatest victory in the computer industry. Xerox could have been the IBM of the '90s. Could have been the Microsoft of the '90s." The bottom line: Jobs argues that sales and marketing people can run companies where products don't change. But in technology, they'll hurt what made the company great.

Data Desk

235,055 次观看 • 8 个月前

When an American company, or frankly Canadian for that matter, gets investors and does a startup. Let's say they put up $10 million bucks or whatever. As soon as it gets to a run rate of five million annually, almost 100% of the time it gets knocked off in China. The company has to recoup the $10 million that it made, let's say in R&D. The Chinese don't so they knock it off and they reintroduce it into the American and Canadian and Mexican market and European market too at 30% to 40% off of the price you're selling it at because they don't have to recoup anything. They're just making pure margin. They have no R&D to recover. This happens thousands of times and there's no recourse.

When an American company, or frankly Canadian for that matter, gets investors and does a startup. Let's say they put up $10 million bucks or whatever. As soon as it gets to a run rate of five million annually, almost 100% of the time it gets knocked off in China. The company has to recoup the $10 million that it made, let's say in R&D. The Chinese don't so they knock it off and they reintroduce it into the American and Canadian and Mexican market and European market too at 30% to 40% off of the price you're selling it at because they don't have to recoup anything. They're just making pure margin. They have no R&D to recover. This happens thousands of times and there's no recourse.

Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful

341,560 次观看 • 1 年前

Charlie Sheen and Bill Maher say the real evil of drugs is that they stop working Bill: “The real evil of drugs is that they don't work as well over time, both in the day and in the long run. When you were shitty to people, you weren't mad at them. You were mad at the drug for not working as it was earlier in the day, earlier in the week, month, and year” Charlie: “It's a resentment like no other”

Charlie Sheen and Bill Maher say the real evil of drugs is that they stop working Bill: “The real evil of drugs is that they don't work as well over time, both in the day and in the long run. When you were shitty to people, you weren't mad at them. You were mad at the drug for not working as it was earlier in the day, earlier in the week, month, and year” Charlie: “It's a resentment like no other”

dank

213,599 次观看 • 3 个月前

Brooke Goldstein sat on a CNN panel and did the one thing that table almost never allows. She spoke as someone who actually went. Two years in and out of Jenin, Ramallah, Tulkarem, and Nablus. Interviews with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, not through a press release and not through a translator who works for the story. They told her to her face that they want war. That is not a talking point she invented in a green room. That is what they said. The rest of the table looked the way people look when the script gets interrupted. They have never been in Samaria or Judea. They have never watched the propaganda machine operate on the ground and then come home to hear it repeated as news. They sit on a sofa in a studio and decide what Israel is allowed to do, while the people who have been there keep getting treated as the problem for noticing that this is an ideology that teaches children to love death and then parks those children in front of the launcher. She said the quiet part without raising her voice. It is not only Hamas. It is what the schools print. It is what the commanders admit. It is why there can be food in the Strip and still be starvation, because Hamas treats the warehouse the same way it treats the tent. CNN will air the clip, then go back to calling itself journalism, and still act wounded the next time someone says the network is selling a product instead of a report. Brooke Goldstein already did the work they refuse to do. They just did not like hearing it at their own table.

Brooke Goldstein sat on a CNN panel and did the one thing that table almost never allows. She spoke as someone who actually went. Two years in and out of Jenin, Ramallah, Tulkarem, and Nablus. Interviews with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, not through a press release and not through a translator who works for the story. They told her to her face that they want war. That is not a talking point she invented in a green room. That is what they said. The rest of the table looked the way people look when the script gets interrupted. They have never been in Samaria or Judea. They have never watched the propaganda machine operate on the ground and then come home to hear it repeated as news. They sit on a sofa in a studio and decide what Israel is allowed to do, while the people who have been there keep getting treated as the problem for noticing that this is an ideology that teaches children to love death and then parks those children in front of the launcher. She said the quiet part without raising her voice. It is not only Hamas. It is what the schools print. It is what the commanders admit. It is why there can be food in the Strip and still be starvation, because Hamas treats the warehouse the same way it treats the tent. CNN will air the clip, then go back to calling itself journalism, and still act wounded the next time someone says the network is selling a product instead of a report. Brooke Goldstein already did the work they refuse to do. They just did not like hearing it at their own table.

Mor Edge Insight

1,759,524 次观看 • 5 天前

Russell Brand dropped the single most important 4:38 you’ll watch in 2025. No rage. No conspiracy memes. Just ice-cold clarity from someone who used to sit at their table. One sentence made my stomach drop so hard I had to replay it three times: “If they truly believed life was sacred… you’d see it in EVERY policy, not just the ones that require your obedience.” Then he quietly explains why the same people who locked you in your house for “compassion” never show that compassion at the root causes of war, borders, or bailouts. And the final 60 seconds? He says the quiet part out loud: They’re not scared of misinformation. They’re scared because trust—and the tools to earn it—are no longer theirs to control. I’ve watched it four times already. Every single time, a different line hits harder. Watch it once. Then tell me in the replies which exact second broke your brain. I’m calling it now: this clip is going to be quoted for years.

Camus

495,485 次观看 • 9 个月前

Great conversation with Governor Cox on Meet the Press about the future of education and innovation. Colorado is a national leader in education, and we’re continuing to invest in the tools, technology, and opportunities that help every student succeed and prepare for the future. Watch the full conversation:

Great conversation with Governor Cox on Meet the Press about the future of education and innovation. Colorado is a national leader in education, and we’re continuing to invest in the tools, technology, and opportunities that help every student succeed and prepare for the future. Watch the full conversation:

Governor Jared Polis

12,881 次观看 • 1 个月前

JOE BIDEN: "We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics." "I don't need you to get me elected." "It's no longer just who gets to vote or making it easier for eligible people to vote." "It's about who gets to count the vote and whether your vote counts at all." Who gets to count the vote?

JOE BIDEN: "We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics." "I don't need you to get me elected." "It's no longer just who gets to vote or making it easier for eligible people to vote." "It's about who gets to count the vote and whether your vote counts at all." Who gets to count the vote?

KanekoaTheGreat

3,513,173 次观看 • 2 年前

Survival in the Serengeti is not about size. It’s about timing, courage, and pure instinct. In this moment, the lioness makes a daring move — taking on one of the tallest animals on the plains. A giraffe is powerful, dangerous, and fast. One wrong step could be fatal. But today, the lioness commits… and she gets it right. This is nature at its rawest. No hesitation. No second chances. Just predator and prey in a battle for survival. The Serengeti doesn’t reward the biggest — it rewards the bold and the precise. This is why every hunt matters. This is survival in the Serengeti. 🦁🔥 📍 Serengeti National Park 🎥 Real wildlife. Real power. Real Africa.

Survival in the Serengeti is not about size. It’s about timing, courage, and pure instinct. In this moment, the lioness makes a daring move — taking on one of the tallest animals on the plains. A giraffe is powerful, dangerous, and fast. One wrong step could be fatal. But today, the lioness commits… and she gets it right. This is nature at its rawest. No hesitation. No second chances. Just predator and prey in a battle for survival. The Serengeti doesn’t reward the biggest — it rewards the bold and the precise. This is why every hunt matters. This is survival in the Serengeti. 🦁🔥 📍 Serengeti National Park 🎥 Real wildlife. Real power. Real Africa.

Nature Chapter

28,866 次观看 • 8 个月前

i watched gemma 4 12b build something genuinely impressive today, and then loop itself to death right in front of me. the full run is in the video, sped up but completely uncut, watch it to the end and you will catch the exact moment it stops building and starts looping right in the middle of the work. the task was clean, build a single file gravity simulator, n-body physics, orbits, collisions, running locally on one 3090 through an agent. and for ten minutes it was a joy to watch. it reached for a symplectic integrator on its own, the correct one, the kind that keeps orbits stable instead of spiralling out. real gravity with softening, proper orbital velocities, momentum conserved on collision. the physics was right. the thing actually worked. then on the very last step, writing a few tests to prove its own code, it fell into a loop. not a crash, a loop. it started repeating itself and would not stop. ten more minutes, thirty four thousand tokens into a single answer, the same fragments over and over, until i killed it myself. so it's not that gemma can't code. it did the hard part beautifully. it cannot finish. it cannot hold a long task together without unravelling, and finishing is the entire job in agentic work. here's the part that stings. i run this exact task, same harness, same card, on the chinese open models, qwen especially, and i never see this. they build it, they test it, they stop. every single time. google has the raw capability, you can see it sitting right there in the code, and then the model loops itself to death on a task a 27b from alibaba finishes clean. open weights, apache 2.0, so much to love on paper. i just need it to know when to stop talking.

i watched gemma 4 12b build something genuinely impressive today, and then loop itself to death right in front of me. the full run is in the video, sped up but completely uncut, watch it to the end and you will catch the exact moment it stops building and starts looping right in the middle of the work. the task was clean, build a single file gravity simulator, n-body physics, orbits, collisions, running locally on one 3090 through an agent. and for ten minutes it was a joy to watch. it reached for a symplectic integrator on its own, the correct one, the kind that keeps orbits stable instead of spiralling out. real gravity with softening, proper orbital velocities, momentum conserved on collision. the physics was right. the thing actually worked. then on the very last step, writing a few tests to prove its own code, it fell into a loop. not a crash, a loop. it started repeating itself and would not stop. ten more minutes, thirty four thousand tokens into a single answer, the same fragments over and over, until i killed it myself. so it's not that gemma can't code. it did the hard part beautifully. it cannot finish. it cannot hold a long task together without unravelling, and finishing is the entire job in agentic work. here's the part that stings. i run this exact task, same harness, same card, on the chinese open models, qwen especially, and i never see this. they build it, they test it, they stop. every single time. google has the raw capability, you can see it sitting right there in the code, and then the model loops itself to death on a task a 27b from alibaba finishes clean. open weights, apache 2.0, so much to love on paper. i just need it to know when to stop talking.

Sudo su

39,764 次观看 • 3 个月前

One of the largest trading firms in the world teaches new hires poker before it lets them near a book. A newspaper brought a camera to the table and sat down to play. The men across the felt are working Wall Street traders. The firm is Susquehanna, which built poker into its training programme decades ago and still runs it that way, on the argument that the card room teaches something no finance degree does. Gunjan Banerji from the Wall Street Journal plays the hands herself rather than interviewing them about it. A green table, a dealer, chips, 4 people who do this for a living. No lecture hall, no slides. The teaching happens between deals, while money is actually at stake. They break it into parts on camera. Risk management first. Then bet sizing. Then patience, which sounds like the soft one and is not. Then reading the person opposite when the only data available is how they behave with money on the table. The section on patience is the one most people skip. Folding is the correct action in the overwhelming majority of hands, and almost nobody can do it for hours without inventing a reason to play. The same failure shows up in a trading account as overtrading, and it kills more people than bad analysis. Then bet sizing, which is where the video earns the watch. Being right about the odds is the easy half. How much you put behind a correct read is the part that ends careers, and they work through it hand by hand instead of describing it in the abstract. The turn is what the traders admit about being wrong. A good decision loses regularly, a bad decision wins regularly, and the only way to last is to grade the process instead of the result. Everything else in the video sits downstream of that. It matters more now than when the firm started running these tables. Every model prices probability in a second and hands it to you for free. Nothing on the screen tells you how much of your account to put behind the number, or what to do after the number was right and you lost anyway. Free on YouTube, produced by a newspaper, filmed at a real table with real hands. The maths is public. The sizing is the job. 1 table. 4 traders. It is in the video.

One of the largest trading firms in the world teaches new hires poker before it lets them near a book. A newspaper brought a camera to the table and sat down to play. The men across the felt are working Wall Street traders. The firm is Susquehanna, which built poker into its training programme decades ago and still runs it that way, on the argument that the card room teaches something no finance degree does. Gunjan Banerji from the Wall Street Journal plays the hands herself rather than interviewing them about it. A green table, a dealer, chips, 4 people who do this for a living. No lecture hall, no slides. The teaching happens between deals, while money is actually at stake. They break it into parts on camera. Risk management first. Then bet sizing. Then patience, which sounds like the soft one and is not. Then reading the person opposite when the only data available is how they behave with money on the table. The section on patience is the one most people skip. Folding is the correct action in the overwhelming majority of hands, and almost nobody can do it for hours without inventing a reason to play. The same failure shows up in a trading account as overtrading, and it kills more people than bad analysis. Then bet sizing, which is where the video earns the watch. Being right about the odds is the easy half. How much you put behind a correct read is the part that ends careers, and they work through it hand by hand instead of describing it in the abstract. The turn is what the traders admit about being wrong. A good decision loses regularly, a bad decision wins regularly, and the only way to last is to grade the process instead of the result. Everything else in the video sits downstream of that. It matters more now than when the firm started running these tables. Every model prices probability in a second and hands it to you for free. Nothing on the screen tells you how much of your account to put behind the number, or what to do after the number was right and you lost anyway. Free on YouTube, produced by a newspaper, filmed at a real table with real hands. The maths is public. The sizing is the job. 1 table. 4 traders. It is in the video.

the lich

62,689 次观看 • 1 个月前

THIS WEBSITE LETS YOU SIT IN THE WINDOW SEAT OF ANY PLANE FLYING OVER YOUR HOUSE RIGHT NOW. no download. no app. no account. you open the tab and you are in the sky. it's called Stowaway. it finds your location. pulls every plane and satellite passing over you right now. click one. hit "Stow away" and you are in the window seat. real terrain. real weather. real light for this exact minute. the guy who made it, jheising, said on Hacker News he built it because as a kid he would watch planes cross the evening sky and try to imagine what the world looked like from up there. Stowaway is that, without the airport. 441 points on Hacker News. people are not bookmarking it. they are flying in it. just a website that lets a normal person see Earth from a stranger's window seat for a few minutes. we built the internet and somehow one of the best things on it right now is still: open tab. sit in a stranger's plane. watch the sunset from 35,000 feet.

THIS WEBSITE LETS YOU SIT IN THE WINDOW SEAT OF ANY PLANE FLYING OVER YOUR HOUSE RIGHT NOW. no download. no app. no account. you open the tab and you are in the sky. it's called Stowaway. it finds your location. pulls every plane and satellite passing over you right now. click one. hit "Stow away" and you are in the window seat. real terrain. real weather. real light for this exact minute. the guy who made it, jheising, said on Hacker News he built it because as a kid he would watch planes cross the evening sky and try to imagine what the world looked like from up there. Stowaway is that, without the airport. 441 points on Hacker News. people are not bookmarking it. they are flying in it. just a website that lets a normal person see Earth from a stranger's window seat for a few minutes. we built the internet and somehow one of the best things on it right now is still: open tab. sit in a stranger's plane. watch the sunset from 35,000 feet.

Nav Toor

1,320,658 次观看 • 26 天前

This is for all the people in the arena ( your life, your career, your family ) who are doing it for them .. not for the validation of the crowd One of the great issues in our society right now is that people live their lives for outside validation, for the clicks, for the likes, for the followers, for the comments. This isn't just in social media. This is happening in the analog and real world too. Too many people are keeping up with the Joneses and worried about what people think about them. They worry about what people think about how much money they have, what school they go to, or even worse, what school their kids go to, and on and on and on … I will continue to make content with the hope it breaks someone out of the hamster wheel and that’s that ❤️❤️❤️❤️

This is for all the people in the arena ( your life, your career, your family ) who are doing it for them .. not for the validation of the crowd One of the great issues in our society right now is that people live their lives for outside validation, for the clicks, for the likes, for the followers, for the comments. This isn't just in social media. This is happening in the analog and real world too. Too many people are keeping up with the Joneses and worried about what people think about them. They worry about what people think about how much money they have, what school they go to, or even worse, what school their kids go to, and on and on and on … I will continue to make content with the hope it breaks someone out of the hamster wheel and that’s that ❤️❤️❤️❤️

Gary Vaynerchuk

19,822 次观看 • 5 个月前