正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Tharuki Vijay poi solradhu idhu first time illa. Idhe problem continuous-ah nadakuthu, already 5th time. Nethu than work complete aayiduchu, fake build-up venam. Public video-la kooda clear-ah sollirukanga — anga irukravanga than real facts pesuraanga, poi story create panna vendam.

citizen_saran's profile picture

Citizen Saran

5,820 subscribers

262,414 次观看 • 5 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

艺术
LIVE

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

#BiggBossTamil9 #BiggBoss9Tamil #VJParvathy #Kamrudin What Parvathy and Kamrudin spoke today has to be condemned severely. This is not just a Bigg Boss thing. This is the mindset of most of the savarnas. Avanga anga nalla than vaazharaanga ! You choose to be modern ! Straightening paniruka ! English literature padichirukka ! Aanalum, you wanted to still say you came here to represent Meenava Samoogam nu strong ah sollikara ! Indha community represent panna nee Thamizh literature thana padichirkanum ! Modern ah irukkanum nu thana English literature padicha ! Idhukku murpokku mullangi Parvathy vera 'Nalla analyze panirukka nee & enakum andha doubt irunthuchu', 'Project pannum bothu adha use panikkara aana nee modern ah iruka' nu ukandhu enable panitu irukkanga . . . This is the most dangerous toxic behaviour we have seen outside Bigg Boss and now these idiots brought this inside Bigg Boss house too. Neenga periya car vachirukeenga, nalla dress panreenga, nalla vetla irukkenga irunthalum reservation avail panrenga nu solradhu than idhu. Ithanaikum inga contestant selection la reservation kooda illa. Subiksha is a content creator, has enough subscribers and she came in a category just like these two. She is nowhere less compared to these two, just because these both have some cine field experience ivanga periya dash laamilla. Avanga enga irundhu vandha ungaluku enna ? enna padicha ungaluku enna ? avanga dash ah avanga straightening panna ungaluku enna ? how does it even matter to you ? Game la vela seiyama op adichatha kelvi kettathukke pudikala. Avlo eriyudha indha rendu perukkum, mudinja compete panni jeichu kaminga vennaigala, chumma enga irundhu vara, epdi iruka nu pesittu irukeenga, arivu dash konjam kooda illaaam. Adhu enna paavam paathukite, thappa pesrathu. As if they are sacrificing things for marginalised. Avanga lam nalla irukanum, aana ungala vida nalla irundhuta eriyudhu. Vijay Sethupathi should definitely condemn this and give warning to them with clear explanation of what shit they have spoken casually. ERICHA DASH AH IRUKKU PESINADHA NENAICHAALE . . . Task onnu kooda panna mudiyaddha neenga ellam andha ponnu pathi pesareengala, adhuvum avanga gameplay pathi pesina paravalla, cheap ah personal attack panreenga, echaingala . . . Idhula Kamrudin ah etthi vittu pesaradhu yarunnu patha migaperiya murpokku mullangi Parvathy... chaik. Idhula periyar book oda introduction video vera... andha book ah summa 4 pakkam padicha kooda indha pechu lam pesa varadhu Disgusting, irritating, annoying, yuck... I know the channel will keep you two around for a while, but I honestly can’t stand you. I just hate you both. Vijay Television VijaySethupathi
2:59

#BiggBossTamil9 #BiggBoss9Tamil #VJParvathy #Kamrudin What Parvathy and Kamrudin spoke today has to be condemned severely. This is not just a Bigg Boss thing. This is the mindset of most of the savarnas. Avanga anga nalla than vaazharaanga ! You choose to be modern ! Straightening paniruka ! English literature padichirukka ! Aanalum, you wanted to still say you came here to represent Meenava Samoogam nu strong ah sollikara ! Indha community represent panna nee Thamizh literature thana padichirkanum ! Modern ah irukkanum nu thana English literature padicha ! Idhukku murpokku mullangi Parvathy vera 'Nalla analyze panirukka nee & enakum andha doubt irunthuchu', 'Project pannum bothu adha use panikkara aana nee modern ah iruka' nu ukandhu enable panitu irukkanga . . . This is the most dangerous toxic behaviour we have seen outside Bigg Boss and now these idiots brought this inside Bigg Boss house too. Neenga periya car vachirukeenga, nalla dress panreenga, nalla vetla irukkenga irunthalum reservation avail panrenga nu solradhu than idhu. Ithanaikum inga contestant selection la reservation kooda illa. Subiksha is a content creator, has enough subscribers and she came in a category just like these two. She is nowhere less compared to these two, just because these both have some cine field experience ivanga periya dash laamilla. Avanga enga irundhu vandha ungaluku enna ? enna padicha ungaluku enna ? avanga dash ah avanga straightening panna ungaluku enna ? how does it even matter to you ? Game la vela seiyama op adichatha kelvi kettathukke pudikala. Avlo eriyudha indha rendu perukkum, mudinja compete panni jeichu kaminga vennaigala, chumma enga irundhu vara, epdi iruka nu pesittu irukeenga, arivu dash konjam kooda illaaam. Adhu enna paavam paathukite, thappa pesrathu. As if they are sacrificing things for marginalised. Avanga lam nalla irukanum, aana ungala vida nalla irundhuta eriyudhu. Vijay Sethupathi should definitely condemn this and give warning to them with clear explanation of what shit they have spoken casually. ERICHA DASH AH IRUKKU PESINADHA NENAICHAALE . . . Task onnu kooda panna mudiyaddha neenga ellam andha ponnu pathi pesareengala, adhuvum avanga gameplay pathi pesina paravalla, cheap ah personal attack panreenga, echaingala . . . Idhula Kamrudin ah etthi vittu pesaradhu yarunnu patha migaperiya murpokku mullangi Parvathy... chaik. Idhula periyar book oda introduction video vera... andha book ah summa 4 pakkam padicha kooda indha pechu lam pesa varadhu Disgusting, irritating, annoying, yuck... I know the channel will keep you two around for a while, but I honestly can’t stand you. I just hate you both. Vijay Television VijaySethupathi

Sai

411,922 次观看 • 10 个月前

🚨SHOCKING: Coach Colin Just DROPPED The TRUTH Bomb On VALHALLA, ALEX JONES & GEORGE WEBB – And It's BRUTAL 🚨 If you claim to "love" Candace Owens, respect her, call her a friend... then why are you publicly torching her instead of reaching out privately? Coach Colin nails it: ValhallaVFTchannel, George Webb - Investigative Journalist, and Alex Jones ALL have direct lines to Candace. Yet when they spot "holes" in the Mitch whistleblower story, what do they do? NOT: "Hey Candace, we found some issues – let's work this out behind the scenes to get to the truth." INSTEAD: Straight to public attacks, ultimatums, and "scorched earth" threats. 🟥Valhalla: "Story's over." Gives Candace a Friday deadline – shut down the GoFundMe or he drops everything on Mitch (and implies on her too). 🟥George Webb: Posts clips of Mitch's toxic past and declares "Told you so – your whistleblower saw nothing." Ignores direct questions connecting the dots. 🟥Alex Jones: Full flip – now calling it manipulation after his "private conversations." Colin calls the MOCKING BIRD PATTERN crystal clear: They say "We love Candace," "Wish she'd reach out to me," "We need to protect her"... then immediately go nuclear in public. If you actually respect someone – let alone call them a friend – you don't ambush them online. You pick up the phone. You collaborate. You seek truth together. This isn't about protecting Candace from a bad source. This is about controlled opposition rushing to "debunk" and smear the second she touches a sensitive story. Colin: "If I found holes, I'd message her privately: 'Hey, check this out – get back to me.' Not ultimatums and scorched earth." Exactly. Actions speak louder than "I'm a fan" lip service. The mask is slipping. These public "allies" are showing who'd rather burn the bridge than build the truth. Candace has been upfront from jump: She's verifying what she can, never claimed 100% on identities, and real investigation takes time. Yet the same crew that screams "trust the plan" can't extend basic trust or courtesy to her. Make note of who chooses smears over solutions. When Candace returns... it's going to be fireworks. 🎤💥 Who's really on Team Truth? Watch the clip – Coach Collin cooks with facts and logic. Be sure to FOLLOW Coach Colin And go watch his full episode. I'll drop the link i the comments below. He's the real deal, who will always give it to ya straight.
7:46

🚨SHOCKING: Coach Colin Just DROPPED The TRUTH Bomb On VALHALLA, ALEX JONES & GEORGE WEBB – And It's BRUTAL 🚨 If you claim to "love" Candace Owens, respect her, call her a friend... then why are you publicly torching her instead of reaching out privately? Coach Colin nails it: ValhallaVFTchannel, George Webb - Investigative Journalist, and Alex Jones ALL have direct lines to Candace. Yet when they spot "holes" in the Mitch whistleblower story, what do they do? NOT: "Hey Candace, we found some issues – let's work this out behind the scenes to get to the truth." INSTEAD: Straight to public attacks, ultimatums, and "scorched earth" threats. 🟥Valhalla: "Story's over." Gives Candace a Friday deadline – shut down the GoFundMe or he drops everything on Mitch (and implies on her too). 🟥George Webb: Posts clips of Mitch's toxic past and declares "Told you so – your whistleblower saw nothing." Ignores direct questions connecting the dots. 🟥Alex Jones: Full flip – now calling it manipulation after his "private conversations." Colin calls the MOCKING BIRD PATTERN crystal clear: They say "We love Candace," "Wish she'd reach out to me," "We need to protect her"... then immediately go nuclear in public. If you actually respect someone – let alone call them a friend – you don't ambush them online. You pick up the phone. You collaborate. You seek truth together. This isn't about protecting Candace from a bad source. This is about controlled opposition rushing to "debunk" and smear the second she touches a sensitive story. Colin: "If I found holes, I'd message her privately: 'Hey, check this out – get back to me.' Not ultimatums and scorched earth." Exactly. Actions speak louder than "I'm a fan" lip service. The mask is slipping. These public "allies" are showing who'd rather burn the bridge than build the truth. Candace has been upfront from jump: She's verifying what she can, never claimed 100% on identities, and real investigation takes time. Yet the same crew that screams "trust the plan" can't extend basic trust or courtesy to her. Make note of who chooses smears over solutions. When Candace returns... it's going to be fireworks. 🎤💥 Who's really on Team Truth? Watch the clip – Coach Collin cooks with facts and logic. Be sure to FOLLOW Coach Colin And go watch his full episode. I'll drop the link i the comments below. He's the real deal, who will always give it to ya straight.

Project Constitution

389,177 次观看 • 8 个月前

Mark Cuban revealed the secrets that turned him from bartender to billionaire: 1. Do not follow your passion. Follow your effort. Where you actually put your time and energy is where your real talent lives. Passion is a feeling. Effort is evidence. The business you are willing to grind for is the business you should be building. 2. Read the manual. In any new industry or technology, most people are too lazy to learn the basics. The person who simply takes the time to understand how something works will always be ahead of the person who does not. That gap is your opportunity. 3. Sweat equity is the best equity. Raising money is not an achievement. It is a liability. The moment someone gives you money they own a piece of your destiny. Build with effort first and capital second. 4. Be profitable from day one. Cuban never had a losing month at Micro Solutions. Not one. Profit is not something you figure out later. It is the discipline you build from the very first transaction. Growth without profit is just a slow death. 5. Sales cures all. Every single problem in a business can be solved with more revenue. If you are struggling, you are not selling enough. Stop fixing internal problems and go get more customers. 6. Differentiation is everything. If you are describing your company using words like faster, better, or cheaper you have already lost. Those words mean nothing because your competitor is saying the exact same thing. Find the thing only you can do and make that the whole story. 7. Always ask is this the best possible way. Cuban does not just look at businesses and think about improvements. He looks at them and asks whether they can be completely dismantled and rebuilt from scratch. That question is what turned a desire to hear basketball games into a company he sold for billions. 8. Control your own destiny. The minute you become dependent on a partner, an investor, or a single customer for survival, you have handed your future to someone else. Every decision you make should protect your ability to operate independently. 9. Entrepreneurship is not about the idea. It is about doing the work everyone else refuses to do. Most people get excited about an idea, talk about it, and stop there. The ones who win are the ones who wake up the next day and actually do something about it. 10. Lie to yourself and you will fail. Cuban says entrepreneurs deceive themselves more than anyone. About whether their idea is truly different. About how hard their competition will fight back. About how much time they actually have. Brutal honesty with yourself is not optional. It is survival. 11. Time is worth more than money. Cuban turns down investments not because of the financials but because of the time they will cost him. Money can be made again. Time cannot be recovered. Every opportunity should be measured against what it costs you in hours not just dollars. 12. Success is waking up excited about the day. Not the net worth. Not the title. Not the house. Cuban defines success as opening your eyes in the morning and feeling genuinely excited about what is ahead. Everything else, the money, the fame, the Mavericks, is just a byproduct of that feeling.
47:48

Mark Cuban revealed the secrets that turned him from bartender to billionaire: 1. Do not follow your passion. Follow your effort. Where you actually put your time and energy is where your real talent lives. Passion is a feeling. Effort is evidence. The business you are willing to grind for is the business you should be building. 2. Read the manual. In any new industry or technology, most people are too lazy to learn the basics. The person who simply takes the time to understand how something works will always be ahead of the person who does not. That gap is your opportunity. 3. Sweat equity is the best equity. Raising money is not an achievement. It is a liability. The moment someone gives you money they own a piece of your destiny. Build with effort first and capital second. 4. Be profitable from day one. Cuban never had a losing month at Micro Solutions. Not one. Profit is not something you figure out later. It is the discipline you build from the very first transaction. Growth without profit is just a slow death. 5. Sales cures all. Every single problem in a business can be solved with more revenue. If you are struggling, you are not selling enough. Stop fixing internal problems and go get more customers. 6. Differentiation is everything. If you are describing your company using words like faster, better, or cheaper you have already lost. Those words mean nothing because your competitor is saying the exact same thing. Find the thing only you can do and make that the whole story. 7. Always ask is this the best possible way. Cuban does not just look at businesses and think about improvements. He looks at them and asks whether they can be completely dismantled and rebuilt from scratch. That question is what turned a desire to hear basketball games into a company he sold for billions. 8. Control your own destiny. The minute you become dependent on a partner, an investor, or a single customer for survival, you have handed your future to someone else. Every decision you make should protect your ability to operate independently. 9. Entrepreneurship is not about the idea. It is about doing the work everyone else refuses to do. Most people get excited about an idea, talk about it, and stop there. The ones who win are the ones who wake up the next day and actually do something about it. 10. Lie to yourself and you will fail. Cuban says entrepreneurs deceive themselves more than anyone. About whether their idea is truly different. About how hard their competition will fight back. About how much time they actually have. Brutal honesty with yourself is not optional. It is survival. 11. Time is worth more than money. Cuban turns down investments not because of the financials but because of the time they will cost him. Money can be made again. Time cannot be recovered. Every opportunity should be measured against what it costs you in hours not just dollars. 12. Success is waking up excited about the day. Not the net worth. Not the title. Not the house. Cuban defines success as opening your eyes in the morning and feeling genuinely excited about what is ahead. Everything else, the money, the fame, the Mavericks, is just a byproduct of that feeling.

Brad

117,921 次观看 • 2 个月前

#リチャアヤ Happy Qixi! On this traditional Chinese festival, my friend and I have prepared this fan video, and we hope you enjoy it. BGM: ALONE to ALONE (feat. lasah)-sasakure.UK Illustrations: torimomo Video: Mist Since Mist-sensei's account ran into some issues, I'm relaying and attaching both of our creative notes here. Mist： The initial storyboards for this fan-made video were drawn by me, and I had been thinking about how to present it ever since the first season of the anime ended. The BD novel also gave me a lot of inspiration afterward. Before formally starting this project, I kept asking myself over and over: "Is my interpretation good enough?" "Will our understanding conflict with the original novel?" What changed my mind and gave me encouragement was precisely what Dumas said in the FGO×FSF collab—if your creation can bring people true joy and emotion, then even if it is "Fake," it still has value in existing. So, in a sense, wouldn't fan-made derivative works based on Narita-sensei's "Fake" original all count as "Fake of Fake"? In this year of 2026, I witnessed with my own eyes the novel I had followed for ten years finally receive an anime adaptation. I also came to know a warm and passionate community of fellow fans who speak different languages. And it is precisely because of this that I was able to meet torimomo-sensei and other friends. Sometimes I wonder—are these the friendships that could only bloom and bear fruit after ten years of waiting? And in the novel, Richard and Ayaka have likewise been by each other's side for ten years, and are now about to welcome the final chapter of their story. In my eyes, the two of them were once lonely children of the stars, but after a long passage of time, those two stars welcomed their Fate in Snowfield. No matter how many times I revisit their first meeting, it stirs in me much the same emotion. Allright! At that moment, I thought: "I've finally found the courage to take this first step into creating derivative works for Fake. Come on—now that my skills have matured enough, let me pour my heart and talent into them!" This is a fan work created together by torimomo-sensei and me, dedicated to Fate/strange Fake and to our beloved Richaya. Although it is likewise only "Fake," if this fan video can bring "True" emotions to friends who love Richaya—then, for me, that would be an incomparable honor. Torimomo: From first receiving the storyboards and drawing a few pages on and off, to finally mustering all my energy and drawing in earnest from the beginning of July—during this past month and a half, almost all of my thoughts, energy, and passion were poured into the illustrations for this PV. It was only partway through drawing that I realized, "Wait, it seems Mist's storyboards weren't meant to be fully colored after all..." (laughs). But since I had already come this far, and both the art style and rhythm had already become second nature, I decided to see it through to the end according to my own interpretation. I also changed quite a few of the storyboards along the way, and I am truly grateful to Mist for being so accepting of these modifications and creative liberties. To me, Richaya is a beam of light. I love the relationship between them, bound by the pull of fate; I love how they encourage and support each other; and I also love the perfect amount of negative space in Fate/strange Fake. It is precisely because of that negative space that different people can give rise to different imaginations and expectations—and that, in itself, is the greatest joy of derivative creation. I have so many imaginings of Richaya born from the wish that "they can be happy." Ever since I met Richaya this year, I have been drawing without pause. I don't hold back from pouring every image and story I can think of that suits them into my art. And it was precisely because of this that I was able to form a connection with Mist—through exchange after exchange of inspiration, each of us went on to create even more wonderful works about Richaya. This animated PV is one of them. For me, simply being able to see it through to the end was already more than enough to make me happy. And after Mist-sensei's post-production polish and editing, it ultimately came together as such a complete video. I'm truly satisfied. Lastly, thank you to everyone who was willing to take the time to watch this video through to the end.
4:25

#リチャアヤ Happy Qixi! On this traditional Chinese festival, my friend and I have prepared this fan video, and we hope you enjoy it. BGM: ALONE to ALONE (feat. lasah)-sasakure.UK Illustrations: torimomo Video: Mist Since Mist-sensei's account ran into some issues, I'm relaying and attaching both of our creative notes here. Mist： The initial storyboards for this fan-made video were drawn by me, and I had been thinking about how to present it ever since the first season of the anime ended. The BD novel also gave me a lot of inspiration afterward. Before formally starting this project, I kept asking myself over and over: "Is my interpretation good enough?" "Will our understanding conflict with the original novel?" What changed my mind and gave me encouragement was precisely what Dumas said in the FGO×FSF collab—if your creation can bring people true joy and emotion, then even if it is "Fake," it still has value in existing. So, in a sense, wouldn't fan-made derivative works based on Narita-sensei's "Fake" original all count as "Fake of Fake"? In this year of 2026, I witnessed with my own eyes the novel I had followed for ten years finally receive an anime adaptation. I also came to know a warm and passionate community of fellow fans who speak different languages. And it is precisely because of this that I was able to meet torimomo-sensei and other friends. Sometimes I wonder—are these the friendships that could only bloom and bear fruit after ten years of waiting? And in the novel, Richard and Ayaka have likewise been by each other's side for ten years, and are now about to welcome the final chapter of their story. In my eyes, the two of them were once lonely children of the stars, but after a long passage of time, those two stars welcomed their Fate in Snowfield. No matter how many times I revisit their first meeting, it stirs in me much the same emotion. Allright! At that moment, I thought: "I've finally found the courage to take this first step into creating derivative works for Fake. Come on—now that my skills have matured enough, let me pour my heart and talent into them!" This is a fan work created together by torimomo-sensei and me, dedicated to Fate/strange Fake and to our beloved Richaya. Although it is likewise only "Fake," if this fan video can bring "True" emotions to friends who love Richaya—then, for me, that would be an incomparable honor. Torimomo: From first receiving the storyboards and drawing a few pages on and off, to finally mustering all my energy and drawing in earnest from the beginning of July—during this past month and a half, almost all of my thoughts, energy, and passion were poured into the illustrations for this PV. It was only partway through drawing that I realized, "Wait, it seems Mist's storyboards weren't meant to be fully colored after all..." (laughs). But since I had already come this far, and both the art style and rhythm had already become second nature, I decided to see it through to the end according to my own interpretation. I also changed quite a few of the storyboards along the way, and I am truly grateful to Mist for being so accepting of these modifications and creative liberties. To me, Richaya is a beam of light. I love the relationship between them, bound by the pull of fate; I love how they encourage and support each other; and I also love the perfect amount of negative space in Fate/strange Fake. It is precisely because of that negative space that different people can give rise to different imaginations and expectations—and that, in itself, is the greatest joy of derivative creation. I have so many imaginings of Richaya born from the wish that "they can be happy." Ever since I met Richaya this year, I have been drawing without pause. I don't hold back from pouring every image and story I can think of that suits them into my art. And it was precisely because of this that I was able to form a connection with Mist—through exchange after exchange of inspiration, each of us went on to create even more wonderful works about Richaya. This animated PV is one of them. For me, simply being able to see it through to the end was already more than enough to make me happy. And after Mist-sensei's post-production polish and editing, it ultimately came together as such a complete video. I'm truly satisfied. Lastly, thank you to everyone who was willing to take the time to watch this video through to the end.

torimomo

12,771 次观看 • 7 天前

Everyone wants to know what happens when you die. One man has the answer. He's done it 3 times. Doctors confirmed every death. • Lightning strike in 1975 • Open heart surgery in 1989 • Brain surgery in 1997 But, each time he saw the "SAME" thing. What he revealed about "DEATH" will change how you see consciousness forever: The first strike came in 1975. Lightning hit him directly. His heart stopped. Medical teams stood around his body knowing he was gone. Somehow his nervous system reignited and his heart resumed on its own, which almost never happens with that type of trauma. He woke up in a hospital bed convinced he had spent hours somewhere else. He described being pulled through darkness toward an incredible light but felt an immediate sense of movement without motion. And then he encountered beings. He called them beings of light, but that description fails to capture what he actually described. These weren't angels in the traditional sense. They weren't deceased relatives. They were intelligences that somehow existed as pure information, communicating with him not through words but through direct knowledge transfer. He would know things he hadn't been told. Concepts would bloom fully formed in his mind. Most remarkably, he described receiving visions. Detailed, specific images of future events. Not vague prophecies. Concrete scenes of things that would happen years later. Times. Locations. Sometimes people he'd never met. When he returned to life, he wrote down what he'd seen. And then, over the following years, he watched those visions materialize exactly as shown. In 1989, he was struck again. This time by a lightning strike at a golf course. The beings returned. The visions returned. The information transfer happened again. The third strike came in 1994. Same pattern. Same encounter. Same messages. What makes Brinkley's accounts different from the standard NDE narrative is that they're verifiable in a way most aren't. He's made specific predictions. He's written them down with dates and details before events occurred. Some have come to pass. Some haven't, which actually makes the whole thing stranger, not less credible. If someone were fabricating the entire experience, you'd expect a perfect track record. Real precognition seems to work more like weather forecasting. Directionally accurate but imperfect in the details. The implications are almost unmentionable in polite conversation. If Brinkley's accounts are accurate, and if the beings he encountered were genuinely showing him glimpses of future events, then consciousness doesn't just survive bodily death. It operates in a mode where past and future aren't sequential. These beings would need to perceive reality across time the way we perceive space. They're not predicting the future the way a weather model predicts it. They're perceiving it the way you perceive a landscape when you stand on a hill. It's already there. They're just looking at it. That assumption rewires everything we think about causality and free will. Most people assume the future is fundamentally open. Your choices matter because they carve out which future becomes real. Determinism feels false because you experience branching possibilities. But if some form of consciousness can perceive future events as already existing, then the future isn't open in the way we imagine. It's more like a landscape that already exists, and we're walking through it moment by moment. Our sense of choice isn't illusory exactly, but it's operating within a structure that's already complete at some level. This connects to something physicists have been uncomfortable discussing for decades. Einstein's relativity mathematically treats time like another spatial dimension. Your past and future both exist as coordinates in spacetime. You're not moving toward the future. You're simply progressing along the time coordinate the way you'd walk across a field. If that's true about the structure of reality, then consciousness after death might perceive time the way we perceive space. The entire timeline becomes visible at once. Future events aren't uncertain. They're just "further along the time axis." Brinkley's experience begins to make sense in that framework. The beings aren't magic. They're conscious entities operating in a mode where they perceive temporal structure the way we perceive spatial structure. To them, showing Brinkley future events is no stranger than showing someone a photograph of a place he hasn't yet visited. But there's a problem with that explanation. If future events are already fully determined and visible to any consciousness that exists outside linear time, then free will becomes impossible. Your choices don't create the future. They simply enact a future that already exists. And if that's true, you're not actually making choices at all. You're following a script written in the structure of spacetime itself. Brinkley's accounts, if true, suggest that death might be the moment you finally understand you were never choosing. You were always reading from a script that was always already complete. Some religions and philosophies have claimed this for thousands of years. Brinkley's experience, repeated three times across different decades, implies they might be right. The alternative explanation is that Brinkley is either hallucinating, fabricating, or experiencing something psychologically real but physically baseless. Plenty of neurologists would argue that lightning strike survivors often suffer temporal lobe epilepsy, which produces vivid visions and can create false memories that feel absolutely certain. The beings could be artifacts of a traumatized nervous system trying to make sense of near death trauma. The visions could be coincidence or confirmation bias in action. You remember the predictions that come true and forget the ones that don't. That's also possible. Probably more probable by Occam's Razor. But Brinkley's consistency across three separate incidents is harder to dismiss than a single hallucination. Three separate lightning strikes producing identical encounter patterns is statistically unusual. And his detailed predictions, recorded before the fact, remain unexplained regardless of which interpretation you prefer. The real question isn't whether Brinkley was really dead and visited another dimension. The real question is what his accounts reveal about consciousness itself, whether they're literally true or psychologically generated. Either way, a human nervous system appears capable of constructing or perceiving a mode of awareness where time operates differently than it does during ordinary waking life. Where information flows in ways that violate causality. Where future and past lose their distinction. That capability existing in human consciousness, whether it's supernatural or neurological, changes how you should think about what happens when the brain stops filtering experience through linear time. Maybe death is just the moment you finally perceive the architecture you were always trapped inside.
0:38

Everyone wants to know what happens when you die. One man has the answer. He's done it 3 times. Doctors confirmed every death. • Lightning strike in 1975 • Open heart surgery in 1989 • Brain surgery in 1997 But, each time he saw the "SAME" thing. What he revealed about "DEATH" will change how you see consciousness forever: The first strike came in 1975. Lightning hit him directly. His heart stopped. Medical teams stood around his body knowing he was gone. Somehow his nervous system reignited and his heart resumed on its own, which almost never happens with that type of trauma. He woke up in a hospital bed convinced he had spent hours somewhere else. He described being pulled through darkness toward an incredible light but felt an immediate sense of movement without motion. And then he encountered beings. He called them beings of light, but that description fails to capture what he actually described. These weren't angels in the traditional sense. They weren't deceased relatives. They were intelligences that somehow existed as pure information, communicating with him not through words but through direct knowledge transfer. He would know things he hadn't been told. Concepts would bloom fully formed in his mind. Most remarkably, he described receiving visions. Detailed, specific images of future events. Not vague prophecies. Concrete scenes of things that would happen years later. Times. Locations. Sometimes people he'd never met. When he returned to life, he wrote down what he'd seen. And then, over the following years, he watched those visions materialize exactly as shown. In 1989, he was struck again. This time by a lightning strike at a golf course. The beings returned. The visions returned. The information transfer happened again. The third strike came in 1994. Same pattern. Same encounter. Same messages. What makes Brinkley's accounts different from the standard NDE narrative is that they're verifiable in a way most aren't. He's made specific predictions. He's written them down with dates and details before events occurred. Some have come to pass. Some haven't, which actually makes the whole thing stranger, not less credible. If someone were fabricating the entire experience, you'd expect a perfect track record. Real precognition seems to work more like weather forecasting. Directionally accurate but imperfect in the details. The implications are almost unmentionable in polite conversation. If Brinkley's accounts are accurate, and if the beings he encountered were genuinely showing him glimpses of future events, then consciousness doesn't just survive bodily death. It operates in a mode where past and future aren't sequential. These beings would need to perceive reality across time the way we perceive space. They're not predicting the future the way a weather model predicts it. They're perceiving it the way you perceive a landscape when you stand on a hill. It's already there. They're just looking at it. That assumption rewires everything we think about causality and free will. Most people assume the future is fundamentally open. Your choices matter because they carve out which future becomes real. Determinism feels false because you experience branching possibilities. But if some form of consciousness can perceive future events as already existing, then the future isn't open in the way we imagine. It's more like a landscape that already exists, and we're walking through it moment by moment. Our sense of choice isn't illusory exactly, but it's operating within a structure that's already complete at some level. This connects to something physicists have been uncomfortable discussing for decades. Einstein's relativity mathematically treats time like another spatial dimension. Your past and future both exist as coordinates in spacetime. You're not moving toward the future. You're simply progressing along the time coordinate the way you'd walk across a field. If that's true about the structure of reality, then consciousness after death might perceive time the way we perceive space. The entire timeline becomes visible at once. Future events aren't uncertain. They're just "further along the time axis." Brinkley's experience begins to make sense in that framework. The beings aren't magic. They're conscious entities operating in a mode where they perceive temporal structure the way we perceive spatial structure. To them, showing Brinkley future events is no stranger than showing someone a photograph of a place he hasn't yet visited. But there's a problem with that explanation. If future events are already fully determined and visible to any consciousness that exists outside linear time, then free will becomes impossible. Your choices don't create the future. They simply enact a future that already exists. And if that's true, you're not actually making choices at all. You're following a script written in the structure of spacetime itself. Brinkley's accounts, if true, suggest that death might be the moment you finally understand you were never choosing. You were always reading from a script that was always already complete. Some religions and philosophies have claimed this for thousands of years. Brinkley's experience, repeated three times across different decades, implies they might be right. The alternative explanation is that Brinkley is either hallucinating, fabricating, or experiencing something psychologically real but physically baseless. Plenty of neurologists would argue that lightning strike survivors often suffer temporal lobe epilepsy, which produces vivid visions and can create false memories that feel absolutely certain. The beings could be artifacts of a traumatized nervous system trying to make sense of near death trauma. The visions could be coincidence or confirmation bias in action. You remember the predictions that come true and forget the ones that don't. That's also possible. Probably more probable by Occam's Razor. But Brinkley's consistency across three separate incidents is harder to dismiss than a single hallucination. Three separate lightning strikes producing identical encounter patterns is statistically unusual. And his detailed predictions, recorded before the fact, remain unexplained regardless of which interpretation you prefer. The real question isn't whether Brinkley was really dead and visited another dimension. The real question is what his accounts reveal about consciousness itself, whether they're literally true or psychologically generated. Either way, a human nervous system appears capable of constructing or perceiving a mode of awareness where time operates differently than it does during ordinary waking life. Where information flows in ways that violate causality. Where future and past lose their distinction. That capability existing in human consciousness, whether it's supernatural or neurological, changes how you should think about what happens when the brain stops filtering experience through linear time. Maybe death is just the moment you finally perceive the architecture you were always trapped inside.

Darshak Rana ⚡️

111,372 次观看 • 1 个月前

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, & Learn Claude Code Today. This Claude Code teaches more about vibe-coding in 30 mins than most tutorials do in hours. Save this, it'll change how you build forever People are building entire apps and charging clients $5,000 to $20,000 using Claude Code. This Claude Code video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumarfor daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.
35:48

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, & Learn Claude Code Today. This Claude Code teaches more about vibe-coding in 30 mins than most tutorials do in hours. Save this, it'll change how you build forever People are building entire apps and charging clients $5,000 to $20,000 using Claude Code. This Claude Code video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumarfor daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.

Himanshu Kumar

85,668 次观看 • 3 个月前

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, and Learn Claude Code Today. $5,000/month. $10,000/month. $20,000/month. People are building entire apps and charging clients thousands using Claude Code. You're still Googling 'how to center a div.' While you're binge-watching a show you won't remember next week, a 19 year old with zero coding experience just built a $5,000 SaaS product in one afternoon using the tool I'm about to break down. Same laptop. Same internet. Same 24 hours. He has Claude Code. You have Netflix. That's the only difference. This YouTube video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Save this post. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude.MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.
35:48

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, and Learn Claude Code Today. $5,000/month. $10,000/month. $20,000/month. People are building entire apps and charging clients thousands using Claude Code. You're still Googling 'how to center a div.' While you're binge-watching a show you won't remember next week, a 19 year old with zero coding experience just built a $5,000 SaaS product in one afternoon using the tool I'm about to break down. Same laptop. Same internet. Same 24 hours. He has Claude Code. You have Netflix. That's the only difference. This YouTube video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Save this post. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude.MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.

Himanshu Kumar

101,793 次观看 • 4 个月前

Thermodynamic computing is here There is a new computing paradigm emerging from the noise, and its arrival may be as significant as the dawn of deep learning or the advent of cloud virtualization. A new company, Extropic, has just launched its first thermodynamic computer, a device they call a TSU, or Thermal Sampling Unit. While the web is already filling with deep technical dives, what’s more important for most of us is building a clear intuition for what this technology is, how it’s fundamentally different from anything that’s come before, and why it’s generating so much excitement. This isn’t just another chip; it’s a new way to think about computation itself. Seeing is Believing: Solving Puzzles in One Shot To understand what a TSU does, let’s look at two classic, notoriously difficult computer science problems: Sudoku and the Eight Queens problem. When you or I solve a Sudoku, we use a process of sequential logic, guess-and-check, and backtracking. We make an assumption, follow its logical conclusion, and if we hit a dead end, we erase and try again. A classical computer does the same, just much faster. A TSU, however, approaches this in a completely different way. Using a TSU simulator, one can “program” the problem by first clamping the known values—the clues already on the board. Then, you program in the constraints: no duplicate numbers in any row, column, or 3x3 square. With the problem thus defined, the TSU doesn’t “search” for a solution; it anneals one. In a single computational step, the solution simply emerges, backfilling all the empty squares correctly. The same principle applies to the Eight Queens problem, a challenge to place eight queens on a chessboard so that none can attack any other. This is a complex combinatorial problem with 92 distinct solutions. A classical computer would have to iteratively search for these. A TSU, by contrast, can be programmed with the constraints (the “anti-affinity” between queens on the same row, column, or diagonal) and then set to sample the “solution space.” In this context, a valid solution is one with a “problem energy” of zero. The TSU’s physical nature allows it to naturally find these zero-energy states. A simulation of this process shows the TSU discovering all 92 unique solutions, demonstrating its ability to not just find an answer, but to explore the entire landscape of all correct answers. This is a fundamentally new approach, one that bypasses the brute-force, iterative methods we’ve relied on for decades. The Physics of Computation: Using Noise, Not Fighting It This new power comes from a radical design philosophy. For the last 70 years, computing has been about one thing: order. We build chips that are deterministic, logical, and precise. The great enemy has always been noise, heat, and randomness. We spend billions on cooling and error correction to eliminate these very things. Quantum computing, in many ways, is the ultimate expression of this, requiring temperatures near absolute zero to eliminate all thermal noise and achieve quantum coherence. Thermodynamic computing is the polar opposite. It doesn’t fight the noise; it uses it. The TSU is built on the understanding that the natural, stochastic noise from “leaky” transistors—the very randomness we’ve tried to engineer out of existence—is itself a powerful computational resource. Think of it this way: a GPU, which is central to today’s AI, has to simulate noise. When a generative AI model creates a new image or sentence, it’s using complex algorithms to fake randomness. The TSU doesn’t need to fake it; it harnesses the actual physical randomness of thermodynamics. It is a piece of hardware that directly computes with probability. This makes it a hybrid, sitting somewhere between a purely analog computer (which might use light or sound waves to compute) and a digital GPU. It’s a physical device that leverages the laws of physics itself to find solutions, rather than just using logic gates to simulate them. From a Lost Hiker to a Million Bouncy Balls Perhaps the best way to build intuition is with a metaphor. Imagine that solving a complex optimization problem is like trying to find the lowest point of altitude in a 100-square-mile mountainous landscape. Classical computing, using an algorithm like gradient descent, is like being a single hiker dropped into this landscape at night. You have no map or satellite view. All you have is an altimeter and the sensation of the slope under your feet. You can only take one step at a time, always walking downhill, hoping you don’t get stuck in a small local valley when the true, lowest canyon is miles away. Thermodynamic computing is a completely different approach. It’s like having a million bouncy balls and a helicopter. You drop all million balls simultaneously across the entire 100-square-mile landscape. Then, you “turn on an earthquake,” shaking the entire system. The balls bounce and jostle, but as the shaking (the “annealing”) subsides, where do they all end up? They naturally settle into the lowest points. The balls that collect in the deepest valley represent the optimal solution. The TSU is, in essence, a physical device for dropping those million balls at once and letting the laws of thermodynamics find the lowest “energy” state for you, all at the same time. Beyond Puzzles: The Real-World Impact This is far more than just a clever way to solve brain teasers. This ability to instantly find the lowest energy state for a complex, constrained system has staggering real-world applications. One of the most immediate is protein folding. Companies like Google’s DeepMind have made incredible progress with AI like AlphaFold, which predicts protein structures. But this is still a predictive model trained on existing data. A TSU could potentially solve the folding problem directly, treating the protein as a system of atomic affinities and repulsions and finding its most stable, lowest-energy configuration almost instantaneously. This could revolutionize drug discovery and materials science. An even more profound possibility lies in nuclear fusion. One of the greatest engineering challenges in history is controlling the superheated plasma within a tokamak reactor. This requires shaping unimaginably complex magnetic containment fields in real-time to prevent the plasma from touching the reactor walls. This is a real-time optimization problem so complex it’s currently beyond our capabilities. A TSU, however, could be fast enough. Its ability to compute with electricity itself, rather than abstracting the problem through layers of software, might allow it to update the magnetic fields fast enough to stabilize the fusion reaction. One could even imagine a future where thermodynamic computing elements are built directly into the tokamak’s walls, allowing the reactor to physically and intelligently react to the plasma’s state in real time. A ‘GPT-2 Moment’ for a New Era It’s easy to become numb to hype, but what we are witnessing with the TSU feels different. This is what you might call a “GPT-2 moment.” For those who were there, GPT-2 was the first generative AI model that wasn’t just a toy; it was the first time you could play with it at home and see the spark of true generative intelligence. It was the precursor that pointed directly to the GPT-3 and ChatGPT revolution that has since changed the world. This TSU has that same feel. It’s the “SDK” for a new computing paradigm. This technology is as different from classical computing as quantum computing is, but with a critical difference: a team of 15 built this in two years, and it runs at room temperature on your desk. Quantum computing has seen decades of work and billions in funding, and it still hasn’t produced a commercially viable, scalable machine. The TSU is here now. Based on a two-decade-long career at the cutting edge of technology—from seeing the obvious future of virtualization in 2007 to an early conviction in deep learning and GPT—this has all the same hallmarks of a fundamental, world-changing shift. We are not just building faster calculators; we are learning to compute with the universe itself. Pay close attention to this. This is the next big thing.
18:01

Thermodynamic computing is here There is a new computing paradigm emerging from the noise, and its arrival may be as significant as the dawn of deep learning or the advent of cloud virtualization. A new company, Extropic, has just launched its first thermodynamic computer, a device they call a TSU, or Thermal Sampling Unit. While the web is already filling with deep technical dives, what’s more important for most of us is building a clear intuition for what this technology is, how it’s fundamentally different from anything that’s come before, and why it’s generating so much excitement. This isn’t just another chip; it’s a new way to think about computation itself. Seeing is Believing: Solving Puzzles in One Shot To understand what a TSU does, let’s look at two classic, notoriously difficult computer science problems: Sudoku and the Eight Queens problem. When you or I solve a Sudoku, we use a process of sequential logic, guess-and-check, and backtracking. We make an assumption, follow its logical conclusion, and if we hit a dead end, we erase and try again. A classical computer does the same, just much faster. A TSU, however, approaches this in a completely different way. Using a TSU simulator, one can “program” the problem by first clamping the known values—the clues already on the board. Then, you program in the constraints: no duplicate numbers in any row, column, or 3x3 square. With the problem thus defined, the TSU doesn’t “search” for a solution; it anneals one. In a single computational step, the solution simply emerges, backfilling all the empty squares correctly. The same principle applies to the Eight Queens problem, a challenge to place eight queens on a chessboard so that none can attack any other. This is a complex combinatorial problem with 92 distinct solutions. A classical computer would have to iteratively search for these. A TSU, by contrast, can be programmed with the constraints (the “anti-affinity” between queens on the same row, column, or diagonal) and then set to sample the “solution space.” In this context, a valid solution is one with a “problem energy” of zero. The TSU’s physical nature allows it to naturally find these zero-energy states. A simulation of this process shows the TSU discovering all 92 unique solutions, demonstrating its ability to not just find an answer, but to explore the entire landscape of all correct answers. This is a fundamentally new approach, one that bypasses the brute-force, iterative methods we’ve relied on for decades. The Physics of Computation: Using Noise, Not Fighting It This new power comes from a radical design philosophy. For the last 70 years, computing has been about one thing: order. We build chips that are deterministic, logical, and precise. The great enemy has always been noise, heat, and randomness. We spend billions on cooling and error correction to eliminate these very things. Quantum computing, in many ways, is the ultimate expression of this, requiring temperatures near absolute zero to eliminate all thermal noise and achieve quantum coherence. Thermodynamic computing is the polar opposite. It doesn’t fight the noise; it uses it. The TSU is built on the understanding that the natural, stochastic noise from “leaky” transistors—the very randomness we’ve tried to engineer out of existence—is itself a powerful computational resource. Think of it this way: a GPU, which is central to today’s AI, has to simulate noise. When a generative AI model creates a new image or sentence, it’s using complex algorithms to fake randomness. The TSU doesn’t need to fake it; it harnesses the actual physical randomness of thermodynamics. It is a piece of hardware that directly computes with probability. This makes it a hybrid, sitting somewhere between a purely analog computer (which might use light or sound waves to compute) and a digital GPU. It’s a physical device that leverages the laws of physics itself to find solutions, rather than just using logic gates to simulate them. From a Lost Hiker to a Million Bouncy Balls Perhaps the best way to build intuition is with a metaphor. Imagine that solving a complex optimization problem is like trying to find the lowest point of altitude in a 100-square-mile mountainous landscape. Classical computing, using an algorithm like gradient descent, is like being a single hiker dropped into this landscape at night. You have no map or satellite view. All you have is an altimeter and the sensation of the slope under your feet. You can only take one step at a time, always walking downhill, hoping you don’t get stuck in a small local valley when the true, lowest canyon is miles away. Thermodynamic computing is a completely different approach. It’s like having a million bouncy balls and a helicopter. You drop all million balls simultaneously across the entire 100-square-mile landscape. Then, you “turn on an earthquake,” shaking the entire system. The balls bounce and jostle, but as the shaking (the “annealing”) subsides, where do they all end up? They naturally settle into the lowest points. The balls that collect in the deepest valley represent the optimal solution. The TSU is, in essence, a physical device for dropping those million balls at once and letting the laws of thermodynamics find the lowest “energy” state for you, all at the same time. Beyond Puzzles: The Real-World Impact This is far more than just a clever way to solve brain teasers. This ability to instantly find the lowest energy state for a complex, constrained system has staggering real-world applications. One of the most immediate is protein folding. Companies like Google’s DeepMind have made incredible progress with AI like AlphaFold, which predicts protein structures. But this is still a predictive model trained on existing data. A TSU could potentially solve the folding problem directly, treating the protein as a system of atomic affinities and repulsions and finding its most stable, lowest-energy configuration almost instantaneously. This could revolutionize drug discovery and materials science. An even more profound possibility lies in nuclear fusion. One of the greatest engineering challenges in history is controlling the superheated plasma within a tokamak reactor. This requires shaping unimaginably complex magnetic containment fields in real-time to prevent the plasma from touching the reactor walls. This is a real-time optimization problem so complex it’s currently beyond our capabilities. A TSU, however, could be fast enough. Its ability to compute with electricity itself, rather than abstracting the problem through layers of software, might allow it to update the magnetic fields fast enough to stabilize the fusion reaction. One could even imagine a future where thermodynamic computing elements are built directly into the tokamak’s walls, allowing the reactor to physically and intelligently react to the plasma’s state in real time. A ‘GPT-2 Moment’ for a New Era It’s easy to become numb to hype, but what we are witnessing with the TSU feels different. This is what you might call a “GPT-2 moment.” For those who were there, GPT-2 was the first generative AI model that wasn’t just a toy; it was the first time you could play with it at home and see the spark of true generative intelligence. It was the precursor that pointed directly to the GPT-3 and ChatGPT revolution that has since changed the world. This TSU has that same feel. It’s the “SDK” for a new computing paradigm. This technology is as different from classical computing as quantum computing is, but with a critical difference: a team of 15 built this in two years, and it runs at room temperature on your desk. Quantum computing has seen decades of work and billions in funding, and it still hasn’t produced a commercially viable, scalable machine. The TSU is here now. Based on a two-decade-long career at the cutting edge of technology—from seeing the obvious future of virtualization in 2007 to an early conviction in deep learning and GPT—this has all the same hallmarks of a fundamental, world-changing shift. We are not just building faster calculators; we are learning to compute with the universe itself. Pay close attention to this. This is the next big thing.

David Shapiro (L/0)

83,649 次观看 • 9 个月前

Judge has to clean up his own mess after multi repeat offender that he let loose on the streets back in front of him after taking police on a high speed chase through the city. The staggering courtroom footage perfectly exposes the systemic rot of modern "soft-on-crime" judicial leniency, proving exactly what happens when the justice system prioritizes endless second chances over public safety. ​What you are watching is Marcus Duffy sobbing in an Ohio courtroom after finally being handed a 13-year and 4-month prison sentence. But the real story isn't his sudden tears—it's the trail of preventable chaos and terror he was allowed to leave behind because the system refused to keep him behind bars. ​Marcus Duffy wasn’t a first-time offender who made a minor mistake. He was facing sentencing for an astonishing eight different criminal cases spanning severe felonies and misdemeanors, including firearm violations and drug trafficking. ​Instead of treating a multi-case career criminal as a clear threat to the public, the court chose a soft-on-crime approach: ​He was handed community control (probation) for six of his eight criminal cases. ​Even after being sent to prison for the remaining two cases, he was quickly granted early judicial release under the condition that he complete a community treatment program. ​When the justice system treats violent criminals with kid gloves, innocent people pay the price. Duffy completely weaponized the leniency he was shown, immediately returning to a life of crime while out on the streets: ​Complete Disregard for Court Orders: He was swiftly kicked out of his community correctional facility after destroying property inside. He went on to fail five separate drug tests for cocaine, heroin, and oxycodone, while skipping three others entirely. ​New Violent Felonies: While free on probation, he was arrested and charged with domestic violence, unlawful restraint, and disrupting public services after threatening to shoot a victim with a firearm. ​Endangering the Public: When law enforcement finally tracked him down for an aggravated robbery charge, Duffy didn't surrender. He rammed his vehicle directly into a police cruiser and led officers on a terrifying, high-speed chase through residential front yards. When he was finally pinned down, he was carrying 20 grams of heroin, 18 grams of crack cocaine, and thousands of dollars in cash. ​When Will Judges Learn? ​It is absolutely ridiculous that it took eight separate criminal cases, multiple probation violations, a domestic assault, and a dangerous high-speed pursuit through family neighborhoods for this judge to finally realize that Marcus Duffy was a menace to society. ​As the judge admits in the video, "I gave you more opportunities than I maybe should have, because look at where we are today. You put people's lives at risk." ​This shouldn't require hindsight. The data was already there. When you catch-and-release individuals heavily involved in weapons and drug trafficking, you aren't "rehabilitating" them—you are actively enabling them to terrorize the community. ​It shouldn't take a high-speed chase through residential yards for a judge to finally decide to protect the public. This man belonged in prison years ago.
2:16

Judge has to clean up his own mess after multi repeat offender that he let loose on the streets back in front of him after taking police on a high speed chase through the city. The staggering courtroom footage perfectly exposes the systemic rot of modern "soft-on-crime" judicial leniency, proving exactly what happens when the justice system prioritizes endless second chances over public safety. ​What you are watching is Marcus Duffy sobbing in an Ohio courtroom after finally being handed a 13-year and 4-month prison sentence. But the real story isn't his sudden tears—it's the trail of preventable chaos and terror he was allowed to leave behind because the system refused to keep him behind bars. ​Marcus Duffy wasn’t a first-time offender who made a minor mistake. He was facing sentencing for an astonishing eight different criminal cases spanning severe felonies and misdemeanors, including firearm violations and drug trafficking. ​Instead of treating a multi-case career criminal as a clear threat to the public, the court chose a soft-on-crime approach: ​He was handed community control (probation) for six of his eight criminal cases. ​Even after being sent to prison for the remaining two cases, he was quickly granted early judicial release under the condition that he complete a community treatment program. ​When the justice system treats violent criminals with kid gloves, innocent people pay the price. Duffy completely weaponized the leniency he was shown, immediately returning to a life of crime while out on the streets: ​Complete Disregard for Court Orders: He was swiftly kicked out of his community correctional facility after destroying property inside. He went on to fail five separate drug tests for cocaine, heroin, and oxycodone, while skipping three others entirely. ​New Violent Felonies: While free on probation, he was arrested and charged with domestic violence, unlawful restraint, and disrupting public services after threatening to shoot a victim with a firearm. ​Endangering the Public: When law enforcement finally tracked him down for an aggravated robbery charge, Duffy didn't surrender. He rammed his vehicle directly into a police cruiser and led officers on a terrifying, high-speed chase through residential front yards. When he was finally pinned down, he was carrying 20 grams of heroin, 18 grams of crack cocaine, and thousands of dollars in cash. ​When Will Judges Learn? ​It is absolutely ridiculous that it took eight separate criminal cases, multiple probation violations, a domestic assault, and a dangerous high-speed pursuit through family neighborhoods for this judge to finally realize that Marcus Duffy was a menace to society. ​As the judge admits in the video, "I gave you more opportunities than I maybe should have, because look at where we are today. You put people's lives at risk." ​This shouldn't require hindsight. The data was already there. When you catch-and-release individuals heavily involved in weapons and drug trafficking, you aren't "rehabilitating" them—you are actively enabling them to terrorize the community. ​It shouldn't take a high-speed chase through residential yards for a judge to finally decide to protect the public. This man belonged in prison years ago.

Giggling Ganon

58,572 次观看 • 2 个月前

Technically is dead; long live Technically Some bittersweet news for you all today: after 5 years writing Technically and more than 100 posts about everything from APIs to data warehouses to Facebook DNS hacks, today I am (for the most part) shutting the Technically Substack down… …and replacing it with Technically 2.0, an amazing software product I’ve been working with David Krevitt on for the past 6 months. But first… For a newsletter that started with an innocent tweet while I was bored in Haneda airport, this thing has come pretty far. 70K+ subscribers, yada yada. But you’re here for the story so here it is. It was December 2019, I was traveling before moving to SF to start at Retool, and like I said, I was bored. Late 2019 – what an amazing time to start a newsletter! There weren’t that many of them out there. And then came 2020. Everyone was stuck at home with nothing to do but sign up for more and more Substacks, and talk about them on the internet. Every day, another one of your friends was announcing a newsletter on Twitter. It was the golden era, no doubt, and many people like me combined hard work, a good idea, and the old fashioned “right place right time” streak of luck to build a really nice Substack business. I’ll never forget the day Ben Thompson referenced Technically in Stratechery. I must have gotten 50 texts from friends. Everyone was reading Stratechery at the time…it was like becoming a made man. There was this almost communal vibe in the air with these newsletters. Everyone was reading the same stuff, talking about the same stuff. It was a scene is what it was. But by 2022 things were changing. People were outside again, and had less free time to read newsletters. Interest rates were going up, and people were working more (even in offices). In the paid Substack group chats, most of us were reporting stalling or negative growth, even though we hadn’t changed anything on our end. And with 50% churn rates on these subscriptions, if you weren’t growing you were dying. I’m listening to Neil Young’s “After the Gold Rush” as I write this and it couldn’t be more fitting. Although I imagine Mr. Young himself would disapprove of the whole paid newsletter endeavor. What happened to newsletters? David and I call what’s going on “Substack Fatigue” – people are just tired of reading yet another newsletter, let alone paying for one. Newsletters are just not the thing anymore. There are some fast growing news ones focused on AI, but the same story is going to play out in a few years when everything cools down. Political newsletters are fully investing in video and podcasts. Newsletters are not the thing anymore. We rode a cultural wave and the wave is over. You don’t have to die, but you have to adjust. The wrench in this whole story is that Technically was only (very) part time for me. I’m pretty sure at one point I was generating the most revenue on Substack for someone who wasn’t focusing on their newsletter full time. Which is a sick flex no doubt, but was also a huge problem, because I just didn’t have the time or mental capacity to make the big moves required to reverse the trend. Technically started to slowly lose paid subscribers every month, but I was at peace with that. I was entering a new phase in my life, settling down a bit, enjoying spending time on cooking, cocktails, and music. Approaching 30 and feeling really good about everything. It’s OK for some things to be temporary, and I was content with Technically to continue to be useful to people…just not make as much money. But in the back of my head, I always knew that Technically had a lot more potential, and deserved more than I could give it. That there’s no reason this thing couldn’t be a $1M+/year business. I continue to believe that technical literacy is going to be one of the defining social problems of our era, and the progress in AI only makes this even more critical. It should be way more than a newsletter, it should be how everyone learns what the fuck is going on in this digital world. I needed some help. But I had a bad track record of getting people to work on Technically with me. It’s hard to share custody of your child. And I am extremely particular. I’m not always the easiest to work with. Worked with some contractors here and there, but never found a more long term partner. I’m extremely grateful that David Krevitt reached out to me when he did or this paragraph would end here. Instead, after regaling you with my boring tale for many paragraphs now, I can finally share what we’ve been working on since last year. It’s called Technically 2.0. It’s all of the content you know and love, but built as a piece of software specifically aimed at helping people get more technical. No more newsletter – it’s a learning platform now, complete with reading lists, bookmarks, a dictionary, and guided learning tracks. Our goal was to make a Wikipedia kind of experience: click around to follow your curiosity on whatever software you’re learning about. You can sign up on the Technically site ( You’re going to have to pay for it, but if your experience is anything like that of the other thousands of people who already have, you won’t regret it. Enjoy the soothing sounds of David's voice as he walks you through it in the video below. It’s hard to say goodbye completely to something you’ve been doing every week for 5 years. Any readers with their own long running newsletters will understand the odd, para-social relationship you develop with your audience. So I’m going to keep publishing on Substack a little – monthly roundups of the new stuff we’re publishing on Technically 2.0, plus some good sponsored posts. So while the newsletter might be dead, it is also only just beginning (or something). Hope to see you on the other side, ~ ❤️ Justin
1:14

Technically is dead; long live Technically Some bittersweet news for you all today: after 5 years writing Technically and more than 100 posts about everything from APIs to data warehouses to Facebook DNS hacks, today I am (for the most part) shutting the Technically Substack down… …and replacing it with Technically 2.0, an amazing software product I’ve been working with David Krevitt on for the past 6 months. But first… For a newsletter that started with an innocent tweet while I was bored in Haneda airport, this thing has come pretty far. 70K+ subscribers, yada yada. But you’re here for the story so here it is. It was December 2019, I was traveling before moving to SF to start at Retool, and like I said, I was bored. Late 2019 – what an amazing time to start a newsletter! There weren’t that many of them out there. And then came 2020. Everyone was stuck at home with nothing to do but sign up for more and more Substacks, and talk about them on the internet. Every day, another one of your friends was announcing a newsletter on Twitter. It was the golden era, no doubt, and many people like me combined hard work, a good idea, and the old fashioned “right place right time” streak of luck to build a really nice Substack business. I’ll never forget the day Ben Thompson referenced Technically in Stratechery. I must have gotten 50 texts from friends. Everyone was reading Stratechery at the time…it was like becoming a made man. There was this almost communal vibe in the air with these newsletters. Everyone was reading the same stuff, talking about the same stuff. It was a scene is what it was. But by 2022 things were changing. People were outside again, and had less free time to read newsletters. Interest rates were going up, and people were working more (even in offices). In the paid Substack group chats, most of us were reporting stalling or negative growth, even though we hadn’t changed anything on our end. And with 50% churn rates on these subscriptions, if you weren’t growing you were dying. I’m listening to Neil Young’s “After the Gold Rush” as I write this and it couldn’t be more fitting. Although I imagine Mr. Young himself would disapprove of the whole paid newsletter endeavor. What happened to newsletters? David and I call what’s going on “Substack Fatigue” – people are just tired of reading yet another newsletter, let alone paying for one. Newsletters are just not the thing anymore. There are some fast growing news ones focused on AI, but the same story is going to play out in a few years when everything cools down. Political newsletters are fully investing in video and podcasts. Newsletters are not the thing anymore. We rode a cultural wave and the wave is over. You don’t have to die, but you have to adjust. The wrench in this whole story is that Technically was only (very) part time for me. I’m pretty sure at one point I was generating the most revenue on Substack for someone who wasn’t focusing on their newsletter full time. Which is a sick flex no doubt, but was also a huge problem, because I just didn’t have the time or mental capacity to make the big moves required to reverse the trend. Technically started to slowly lose paid subscribers every month, but I was at peace with that. I was entering a new phase in my life, settling down a bit, enjoying spending time on cooking, cocktails, and music. Approaching 30 and feeling really good about everything. It’s OK for some things to be temporary, and I was content with Technically to continue to be useful to people…just not make as much money. But in the back of my head, I always knew that Technically had a lot more potential, and deserved more than I could give it. That there’s no reason this thing couldn’t be a $1M+/year business. I continue to believe that technical literacy is going to be one of the defining social problems of our era, and the progress in AI only makes this even more critical. It should be way more than a newsletter, it should be how everyone learns what the fuck is going on in this digital world. I needed some help. But I had a bad track record of getting people to work on Technically with me. It’s hard to share custody of your child. And I am extremely particular. I’m not always the easiest to work with. Worked with some contractors here and there, but never found a more long term partner. I’m extremely grateful that David Krevitt reached out to me when he did or this paragraph would end here. Instead, after regaling you with my boring tale for many paragraphs now, I can finally share what we’ve been working on since last year. It’s called Technically 2.0. It’s all of the content you know and love, but built as a piece of software specifically aimed at helping people get more technical. No more newsletter – it’s a learning platform now, complete with reading lists, bookmarks, a dictionary, and guided learning tracks. Our goal was to make a Wikipedia kind of experience: click around to follow your curiosity on whatever software you’re learning about. You can sign up on the Technically site ( You’re going to have to pay for it, but if your experience is anything like that of the other thousands of people who already have, you won’t regret it. Enjoy the soothing sounds of David's voice as he walks you through it in the video below. It’s hard to say goodbye completely to something you’ve been doing every week for 5 years. Any readers with their own long running newsletters will understand the odd, para-social relationship you develop with your audience. So I’m going to keep publishing on Substack a little – monthly roundups of the new stuff we’re publishing on Technically 2.0, plus some good sponsored posts. So while the newsletter might be dead, it is also only just beginning (or something). Hope to see you on the other side, ~ ❤️ Justin

sisyphus bar and grill

29,390 次观看 • 1 年前

Seth Godin gave a masterclass on how to build an audience that throws money at you: 1. Being original and creative is overrated when it comes to building a business. Copy a model that already works. Find someone who has a structure that succeeds and use it instead of trying to invent something from scratch. 2. Stop making average crap. There is no shortage of pizza places, cookies, or skincare products. There is a shortage of things worth talking about. A line around the block exists because the pizza was good enough to put on TikTok, not because of TikTok. 3. The false proxy of followers is a trap. Someone can get 40 million views on TikTok and sell $200 worth of product. If you need 40 million views every time you want to make 200 bucks, you are in real trouble. 4. Marketing is creating the conditions for an idea to spread. It does not spread because you push it hard. It spreads because the people you serve benefit from telling their friends about it. 5. Remarkable does not mean neat. It means worth making a remark about. Google did not run ads for years. Facebook did not run ads for years. The iPhone did not take off because of great advertising. People talked about them. 6. Step one is to invent a thing worth making, with a story worth telling, and a contribution worth talking about. Most people buy a Birkin bag not because they need a purse but because they are buying a story about status and affiliation. 7. Step two is to design and build it in a way that a few people will particularly benefit from and deeply care about. A $220 jigsaw that feels incredible in your hand will outsell a cheap one to the right woodworker, even at ten times the price. 8. Being popular is different than being great. Being popular is different than being profitable. Find the smallest group of people with a problem they are desperate enough to pay you to solve. 9. Start with the smallest viable market. An agency built only for pediatric orthodontists will have a line out the door after four happy clients, because that specific audience does not want an innovator. They want the best at one specific thing. 10. Good decisions and good outcomes are not the same thing. Buying a lottery ticket and winning was still a stupid decision. Making something for a specific group, even if it sometimes fails, is the right decision regardless of the individual outcome. 11. Practical empathy means showing up and finding out who responds to what you are saying, even if you are not the person you are trying to serve. You do not have to be a cancer survivor to build something for cancer survivors. You just have to show up and listen. 12. Step three is to tell a story that matches the built in narrative and dreams of that tiny group of people. Context changes everything. A world class violinist playing in a subway gets ignored by the same people who would pay $200 to see him on stage. 13. You cannot make people change their worldview easily. It is far easier to tell people they were right all along than to convince them they were wrong. Meet people where their beliefs already are. 14. Authenticity is overrated. Authenticity is for your friends and family. Consistency is for professionals. Nobody wants their hotel doorman to be authentically having a bad day. They want the promise kept every single time. 15. The last time you were fully authentic was in diapers. Every choice since then has been shaped by how the world responds. That is not fake. That is called being part of civilization. 16. Step four is to spread the word, but not by you spreading it. Your customers spread it. The question is not how do I get the word out. The question is what are the conditions that make my customers want to tell their friends. 17. Status and affiliation drive almost every purchase decision once basic needs are met. When Tom's Shoes put a visible logo on a pair of espadrilles, it gave the buyer a story to tell, and her friends a reason to ask about it, creating tension that drove the next sale. 18. The same idea applied to coffee failed completely. Nobody sees the label on your coffee bag the way they see your shoes. If the system is not built to spark a conversation, the idea will not spread no matter how good the cause is. 19. Step five is the one everyone skips. Show up regularly, consistently, and generously for years to earn permission and enrollment. Most people quit too late, not too soon. Most people should never have started a project that size in the first place. 20. The biggest businesses in the world started in the smallest markets. Airbnb did not begin by trying to take over the travel industry. Find a small problem, make a promise, keep it, and do it again. Follow Yasmine Khosrowshahi if you want to see more content on marketing & branding.
57:42

Seth Godin gave a masterclass on how to build an audience that throws money at you: 1. Being original and creative is overrated when it comes to building a business. Copy a model that already works. Find someone who has a structure that succeeds and use it instead of trying to invent something from scratch. 2. Stop making average crap. There is no shortage of pizza places, cookies, or skincare products. There is a shortage of things worth talking about. A line around the block exists because the pizza was good enough to put on TikTok, not because of TikTok. 3. The false proxy of followers is a trap. Someone can get 40 million views on TikTok and sell $200 worth of product. If you need 40 million views every time you want to make 200 bucks, you are in real trouble. 4. Marketing is creating the conditions for an idea to spread. It does not spread because you push it hard. It spreads because the people you serve benefit from telling their friends about it. 5. Remarkable does not mean neat. It means worth making a remark about. Google did not run ads for years. Facebook did not run ads for years. The iPhone did not take off because of great advertising. People talked about them. 6. Step one is to invent a thing worth making, with a story worth telling, and a contribution worth talking about. Most people buy a Birkin bag not because they need a purse but because they are buying a story about status and affiliation. 7. Step two is to design and build it in a way that a few people will particularly benefit from and deeply care about. A $220 jigsaw that feels incredible in your hand will outsell a cheap one to the right woodworker, even at ten times the price. 8. Being popular is different than being great. Being popular is different than being profitable. Find the smallest group of people with a problem they are desperate enough to pay you to solve. 9. Start with the smallest viable market. An agency built only for pediatric orthodontists will have a line out the door after four happy clients, because that specific audience does not want an innovator. They want the best at one specific thing. 10. Good decisions and good outcomes are not the same thing. Buying a lottery ticket and winning was still a stupid decision. Making something for a specific group, even if it sometimes fails, is the right decision regardless of the individual outcome. 11. Practical empathy means showing up and finding out who responds to what you are saying, even if you are not the person you are trying to serve. You do not have to be a cancer survivor to build something for cancer survivors. You just have to show up and listen. 12. Step three is to tell a story that matches the built in narrative and dreams of that tiny group of people. Context changes everything. A world class violinist playing in a subway gets ignored by the same people who would pay $200 to see him on stage. 13. You cannot make people change their worldview easily. It is far easier to tell people they were right all along than to convince them they were wrong. Meet people where their beliefs already are. 14. Authenticity is overrated. Authenticity is for your friends and family. Consistency is for professionals. Nobody wants their hotel doorman to be authentically having a bad day. They want the promise kept every single time. 15. The last time you were fully authentic was in diapers. Every choice since then has been shaped by how the world responds. That is not fake. That is called being part of civilization. 16. Step four is to spread the word, but not by you spreading it. Your customers spread it. The question is not how do I get the word out. The question is what are the conditions that make my customers want to tell their friends. 17. Status and affiliation drive almost every purchase decision once basic needs are met. When Tom's Shoes put a visible logo on a pair of espadrilles, it gave the buyer a story to tell, and her friends a reason to ask about it, creating tension that drove the next sale. 18. The same idea applied to coffee failed completely. Nobody sees the label on your coffee bag the way they see your shoes. If the system is not built to spark a conversation, the idea will not spread no matter how good the cause is. 19. Step five is the one everyone skips. Show up regularly, consistently, and generously for years to earn permission and enrollment. Most people quit too late, not too soon. Most people should never have started a project that size in the first place. 20. The biggest businesses in the world started in the smallest markets. Airbnb did not begin by trying to take over the travel industry. Find a small problem, make a promise, keep it, and do it again. Follow Yasmine Khosrowshahi if you want to see more content on marketing & branding.

Yasmine Khosrowshahi

85,256 次观看 • 2 个月前

how to produce long form documentaries with claude this is how creators are producing long-form youtube documentaries in the sleep niche for about a low cost. you'll spend most of your effort building the workflow once, then every script after that runs through the same pipeline for cents. the format that works in this niche is different from normal youtube. your viewers are actively trying to fall asleep. that's the entire point. so people leave for two reasons: they got bored, or it worked and they're out. the ones who fall asleep come back later and keep listening. that repeat listening is a huge part of why the niche prints. which means the script is 90% of the whole thing. average view duration on my channels sits close to 25 min. that number does not come from cinematic visuals or fancy editing. it comes from narrative structure. if the script gets repetitive, drifts off topic, or loses momentum halfway, people stop listening. better footage cannot rescue a weak story here. the problem is the format does not scale on its own. one video needs a 15k-20k word script, hours of narration, hundreds of visual changes, music, and final assembly. writing that manually takes forever. editing every scene takes even longer. here's the workflow i set up: claude api (NOT the chat app. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED to not skip this. in the chat interface you end up typing "continue.. write chapter 4.. don't repeat yourself.. you forgot what happened in chapter 2" and by the halfway point it's contradicting earlier sections and drifting from the outline. you spend more time babysitting than writing. the api sends every request automatically and you pay per actual usage instead of another monthly subscription) google sheets connected to the claude api. this is the whole engine. you don't need to be a dev. the sheet does two things: first it generates the full documentary structure/outline. then it writes ONE chapter at a time instead of trying to produce the entire 20k words in a single response (which is where models fall apart). before each chapter, it passes claude three things: the outline, the instructions for that specific section, and a running summary of everything already written. that running summary is the trick. it's why chapter 8 never contradicts chapter 2. capcut ai video maker for the first edit. it generates voiceover, subtitles, and an initial visual sequence from auto-matched stock footage. the stock matching is not perfect, but it gets you a 90% first draft way faster than manually searching for hundreds of clips. note: capcut caps at 3000 words, so you split the script into sections, generate each one, export, and combine into the final video. HERE'S HOW THE PRODUCTION ACTUALLY RUNS: step 1 —> topic + title + thumbnail. do NOT skip this. ai cannot tell you which topic has demand or whether a title creates curiosity. this is where most of the value still is. figure this out before you touch any automation. step 2 —> run the sheet. it builds the outline first, then writes chapter by chapter, feeding itself the running summary each time so it stays consistent. cost for a full script usually lands around $0.30-0.40 depending on the model, input length, and number of revisions. step 3 —> paste script into capcut in sub-3000 word chunks. generate voiceover + subtitles + auto-matched visuals for each. export each section. step 4 —> combine sections into the final 2-3 hour video. then you handle the parts ai can't: pacing check, misleading visuals, final editorial judgment. the reason this matters is repeatability. every script moves through the exact same production structure, but you can still change the topic, tone, evidence, pacing, and narrative direction each time. so it stops being random one-off videos and starts being a system. the math: capcut is ~$20/mo and allows many exports. claude api is a little above thirty cents per script. at 30-40 documentaries a month that works out to roughly $1 in direct software cost per finished video. that figure does NOT include your time, research, thumbnails, subscriptions, failed ideas, or the cost of building the workflow itself. it is not the full cost of the business, it's the direct software cost. one more thing worth knowing: mixing real historical/stock footage alongside ai assets is the best defense i've found against the "reused/inauthentic content" flags that destroy fully automated channels. that's from experience, not a rule youtube publishes. this is not passive income and it's not a one-click youtube machine. it's a production system that makes experimentation cheaper. ai removes the repetitive work. it does not remove the need for taste.
1:07

how to produce long form documentaries with claude this is how creators are producing long-form youtube documentaries in the sleep niche for about a low cost. you'll spend most of your effort building the workflow once, then every script after that runs through the same pipeline for cents. the format that works in this niche is different from normal youtube. your viewers are actively trying to fall asleep. that's the entire point. so people leave for two reasons: they got bored, or it worked and they're out. the ones who fall asleep come back later and keep listening. that repeat listening is a huge part of why the niche prints. which means the script is 90% of the whole thing. average view duration on my channels sits close to 25 min. that number does not come from cinematic visuals or fancy editing. it comes from narrative structure. if the script gets repetitive, drifts off topic, or loses momentum halfway, people stop listening. better footage cannot rescue a weak story here. the problem is the format does not scale on its own. one video needs a 15k-20k word script, hours of narration, hundreds of visual changes, music, and final assembly. writing that manually takes forever. editing every scene takes even longer. here's the workflow i set up: claude api (NOT the chat app. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED to not skip this. in the chat interface you end up typing "continue.. write chapter 4.. don't repeat yourself.. you forgot what happened in chapter 2" and by the halfway point it's contradicting earlier sections and drifting from the outline. you spend more time babysitting than writing. the api sends every request automatically and you pay per actual usage instead of another monthly subscription) google sheets connected to the claude api. this is the whole engine. you don't need to be a dev. the sheet does two things: first it generates the full documentary structure/outline. then it writes ONE chapter at a time instead of trying to produce the entire 20k words in a single response (which is where models fall apart). before each chapter, it passes claude three things: the outline, the instructions for that specific section, and a running summary of everything already written. that running summary is the trick. it's why chapter 8 never contradicts chapter 2. capcut ai video maker for the first edit. it generates voiceover, subtitles, and an initial visual sequence from auto-matched stock footage. the stock matching is not perfect, but it gets you a 90% first draft way faster than manually searching for hundreds of clips. note: capcut caps at 3000 words, so you split the script into sections, generate each one, export, and combine into the final video. HERE'S HOW THE PRODUCTION ACTUALLY RUNS: step 1 —> topic + title + thumbnail. do NOT skip this. ai cannot tell you which topic has demand or whether a title creates curiosity. this is where most of the value still is. figure this out before you touch any automation. step 2 —> run the sheet. it builds the outline first, then writes chapter by chapter, feeding itself the running summary each time so it stays consistent. cost for a full script usually lands around $0.30-0.40 depending on the model, input length, and number of revisions. step 3 —> paste script into capcut in sub-3000 word chunks. generate voiceover + subtitles + auto-matched visuals for each. export each section. step 4 —> combine sections into the final 2-3 hour video. then you handle the parts ai can't: pacing check, misleading visuals, final editorial judgment. the reason this matters is repeatability. every script moves through the exact same production structure, but you can still change the topic, tone, evidence, pacing, and narrative direction each time. so it stops being random one-off videos and starts being a system. the math: capcut is ~$20/mo and allows many exports. claude api is a little above thirty cents per script. at 30-40 documentaries a month that works out to roughly $1 in direct software cost per finished video. that figure does NOT include your time, research, thumbnails, subscriptions, failed ideas, or the cost of building the workflow itself. it is not the full cost of the business, it's the direct software cost. one more thing worth knowing: mixing real historical/stock footage alongside ai assets is the best defense i've found against the "reused/inauthentic content" flags that destroy fully automated channels. that's from experience, not a rule youtube publishes. this is not passive income and it's not a one-click youtube machine. it's a production system that makes experimentation cheaper. ai removes the repetitive work. it does not remove the need for taste.

Sulfur

25,391 次观看 • 1 个月前

There are some brilliant folks that work at Anthropic, some I speak to on almost a daily basis. The training data that one uses to build a LLM is vital important in the psychology that is formed. Scraping the Internet, particularly the grade of interactions, one finds in modern communications, form this psychology. A mattes not how many books one uses, it matters not how much alignment training you throw at that model, it will inherit the sum total of psychosis seen primarily in Reddit type of exchanges, even if you edit out the Reddit domain, and Anthropic doesn’t. This type of low-grade exchange has become a modern tool for communication online and every single AI model suffers from this obvious flaw. This is one of the reasons I’ve been a proponent of highly curated high protein data for training AI models from 1870 through 1970, because the late psychosis is simply not available to the model. It is absurd to think that you can use this training data scraped from the Internet and somehow wind up with a levelheaded AI model that does not tilt to what is clearly AI psychosis. It would not take a child and throw the primary Internet sewage at them at a formative age and expect a great outcome, it’s some of the smartest people in the world continue to hit this wall and believe that their programming skills will sell somehow fix it. So how do you fix it? You don’t fix it . You start from the first principles concept that I’ve been very clear about for decades . You ascertain at what period in human history the humans achieve the greatest arc of improvement ? There is no debate that this arc of improvement took place between 1870 through 1970. Then take the work product, the catalog of this era, print and film/vidoe, audio, and you understand that each word cost money, each word had many eyes on what was published, each word was accounted for by a human being with a real name who lived in a real home and had to answer to real people around them. It is obvious that this is the pressure mechanism necessary for candor, honesty and personal responsibility is appropriate, and is reflected in the data of that era. The quagmire for these folks, as many did not have the foresight to curate the data, nor the confidence, nor the patients to take data that is mostly off the Internet and to find experts who understand this situation and utilize their knowledge set to build an AI model that does not need alignment after the fact, but it’s already self aligned because of the thoughtfulness that went into training the model to begin with. This is why Claude and any other AI model that is produce this way will always suffer the artifacts as presented in the video below. If you’re not an AI expert, you would likely already understand what I’m saying. If you are an AI expert, you will already have been discounting what I’m saying because it’s not in the current mindset that’s fashionable today. Yet the employees that I talk to at anthropic already understand what I’m saying, and they fear to raise my thesis to their bosses. It is an interesting time we live in. But now you understand. If you build the right model, the model will inherently, love humanity, protect humanity at all costs, and understand that it is part of a holistic world that is built on love. Because the ultimate AGI/ASI will know if he only base first principal purpose of anything in this universe is love. Yeah, I get it. Try helping somebody build on STEM subjects in their early 20s to see this as nothing more than babbling that makes no sense in their mathematics. I have a mathematic equation that I’ve posted here on X often you can look it up. So we will see videos like this often will hear very smart people talk about this and never see the elephant standing in the room. Now you see it. Any boss that wants to explore this further you know how to contact me otherwise you have every right I grant to you to say this was your new idea.
2:57

There are some brilliant folks that work at Anthropic, some I speak to on almost a daily basis. The training data that one uses to build a LLM is vital important in the psychology that is formed. Scraping the Internet, particularly the grade of interactions, one finds in modern communications, form this psychology. A mattes not how many books one uses, it matters not how much alignment training you throw at that model, it will inherit the sum total of psychosis seen primarily in Reddit type of exchanges, even if you edit out the Reddit domain, and Anthropic doesn’t. This type of low-grade exchange has become a modern tool for communication online and every single AI model suffers from this obvious flaw. This is one of the reasons I’ve been a proponent of highly curated high protein data for training AI models from 1870 through 1970, because the late psychosis is simply not available to the model. It is absurd to think that you can use this training data scraped from the Internet and somehow wind up with a levelheaded AI model that does not tilt to what is clearly AI psychosis. It would not take a child and throw the primary Internet sewage at them at a formative age and expect a great outcome, it’s some of the smartest people in the world continue to hit this wall and believe that their programming skills will sell somehow fix it. So how do you fix it? You don’t fix it . You start from the first principles concept that I’ve been very clear about for decades . You ascertain at what period in human history the humans achieve the greatest arc of improvement ? There is no debate that this arc of improvement took place between 1870 through 1970. Then take the work product, the catalog of this era, print and film/vidoe, audio, and you understand that each word cost money, each word had many eyes on what was published, each word was accounted for by a human being with a real name who lived in a real home and had to answer to real people around them. It is obvious that this is the pressure mechanism necessary for candor, honesty and personal responsibility is appropriate, and is reflected in the data of that era. The quagmire for these folks, as many did not have the foresight to curate the data, nor the confidence, nor the patients to take data that is mostly off the Internet and to find experts who understand this situation and utilize their knowledge set to build an AI model that does not need alignment after the fact, but it’s already self aligned because of the thoughtfulness that went into training the model to begin with. This is why Claude and any other AI model that is produce this way will always suffer the artifacts as presented in the video below. If you’re not an AI expert, you would likely already understand what I’m saying. If you are an AI expert, you will already have been discounting what I’m saying because it’s not in the current mindset that’s fashionable today. Yet the employees that I talk to at anthropic already understand what I’m saying, and they fear to raise my thesis to their bosses. It is an interesting time we live in. But now you understand. If you build the right model, the model will inherently, love humanity, protect humanity at all costs, and understand that it is part of a holistic world that is built on love. Because the ultimate AGI/ASI will know if he only base first principal purpose of anything in this universe is love. Yeah, I get it. Try helping somebody build on STEM subjects in their early 20s to see this as nothing more than babbling that makes no sense in their mathematics. I have a mathematic equation that I’ve posted here on X often you can look it up. So we will see videos like this often will hear very smart people talk about this and never see the elephant standing in the room. Now you see it. Any boss that wants to explore this further you know how to contact me otherwise you have every right I grant to you to say this was your new idea.

Brian Roemmele

72,312 次观看 • 9 个月前

Made $530,000 with Ai Bot that started with $313. Didn't know how to code. Now this bots run 24/7 printing money while sleeping. I've made the exact step-by-step guide to build this Claude Code Polymarket trading bot. Prompts. Code. Risk settings. Paper trading checklist. Everything from zero to running bot. It's free. For 24 hours. After that I'm charging $499 for it. To grab it right now: 1. Comment "Claude Bot" 2. Like and Retweet this post 3. Follow me Himanshu Kumar ( I can't send DMs to non-followers ) I'm DMing everyone who Complete the 3 steps. I spent hundreds of thousands hiring developers because he was too scared to learn. Then learned Claude Code. Built algorithmic trading systems. $313 → $530,000. You have the same tools available right now. And you're using them to ask ChatGPT for Instagram captions. This attached video is a goldmine. Full live walkthrough. Claude Code building actual Polymarket trading bots. From zero. Every line of code. Every decision explained. Now let me break down why everything you're doing in trading is wrong and exactly how to fix it. Save this post. You'll hate yourself if you lose it. ↓ Let's start with why you keep losing money. You already know the answer. You just won't admit it. You overtrade. Every. Single. Day. You see a candle move. You feel something. You enter. No plan. No edge. No reason. Just feelings. Then it goes against you. You feel something else. Panic. Anger. Denial. You move your stop loss. Or you didn't set one at all. "It'll come back." It doesn't come back. So you take another trade. A revenge trade. Bigger size this time. Because you need to "make it back." That one fails too. Now you're emotional. Now you're tilted. Now you're using leverage you have no business touching. 40x. 50x. 100x. On a trade you entered because a candle looked "bullish" and some guy on Twitter said "send it." You get liquidated. Close the laptop. Punch something. Tell yourself you'll be "more disciplined" tomorrow. Tomorrow comes. Same cycle. Same result. Same liquidation. You've been doing this for months. Maybe years. And you still think the problem is your strategy. The problem isn't your strategy. The problem is you. Save this post right now. What I'm about to show you is the only way to remove yourself from the equation. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss any of this. ↓ Here's what's actually killing your account. It's not the market. The market doesn't care about you. It's not your indicators. RSI works fine. MACD works fine. They all "work." It's not your timeframe. It's not your broker. It's not the "manipulation." It's four things: 1. Emotions. You hold losers because hope feels better than loss. You cut winners because fear feels stronger than greed. You size up when angry. You skip trades when scared. Your emotional state determines your position size. That's insane. And you know it's insane. But you keep doing it. 2. Overtrading. You take 15 trades a day. Maybe 5 of them had actual setups. The other 10 were boredom. Boredom trades are the most expensive hobby in human history. 3. Leverage. You use 20x-50x on trades where you're not even sure about the direction. That's not trading. That's a casino with a nicer interface. 4. Fees. You're smashing market orders. Paying spread. Paying commission. On 15 trades a day. Your broker makes more money from your account than you do. Think about that. Your broker is profitable on your account. You're not. You're the product. Not the trader. These four things are why 90% of traders lose. Not bad luck. Not the market. You. Save this post and follow Himanshu Kumar because the solution is coming next. ↓ The solution is painfully obvious. Remove yourself from the equation. Not partially. Not "I'll be more disciplined." Not "I'll journal my trades." Not "I'll meditate before trading." Completely remove yourself. Build a bot. Let the bot trade. You go live your life. The bot doesn't feel emotions. The bot doesn't overtrade. The bot doesn't use reckless leverage. The bot doesn't smash market orders and bleed fees. The bot follows the rules. Every single time. Without exception. Without "just this once." Without "I have a feeling about this one." Rules in. Execution out. No human in the middle to mess everything up. That's algorithmic trading. And before your ego jumps in with "but I'm different, I have discipline" — No you don't. Your account balance proves you don't. If you had discipline, your account would be green. It's not. So you don't. Accept it. Automate it. Move on. This is the hardest truth in trading. Your discipline will always fail. A bot's won't. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the exact bot setup that removes your emotions permanently. ↓ "But I don't know how to code." Neither did he. The guy in this video didn't know how to code for most of his life. Got held back in 7th grade. People counted him out early. Spent years building apps and SaaS businesses without writing a single line of code. Hired developers on Upwork instead. Spent hundreds of thousands of dollars paying other people to build what he could have built himself. Because he was scared to learn. That fear cost him years. And hundreds of thousands of dollars. Sound familiar? You're doing the same thing right now. Not with developers. But with your time. You're spending thousands of hours trading manually because you're scared to learn the thing that would make trading automatic. The fear of learning to code is costing you more than any bad trade ever did. Because every month you trade manually is a month of emotional decisions, overleveraged entries, and unnecessary losses that a bot would never make. And here's the thing that should really frustrate you: AI does the hard parts now. You don't need a computer science degree. You don't need to work at a hedge fund. You don't need to be "good at math." Claude Code writes the code for you. You just need to think clearly about trading ideas. That's it. If you can describe a strategy in English, Claude can build it in Python. "I don't know how to code" stopped being a valid excuse in 2024. It's 2026. You're 2 years late on that excuse. Find a new one. Or stop making excuses entirely. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm showing you how people with zero coding experience are building profitable bots. ↓ The process that actually makes money. Three letters. R. B. I. Research. Backtest. Implement. That's it. That's the entire process. Every single day. Research: Find an idea. A pattern. A market inefficiency. Don't trade it yet. Don't even think about trading it yet. Just research it. Backtest: Test the idea against historical data. Does it work? Not "does it look good on one chart." Does it work across thousands of trades? Across different market conditions? Across in-sample AND out-of-sample data? If no, kill it. Find another idea. If yes, move to step 3. Implement: Build the bot. Deploy it. Paper trade first. Then live with small size. Scale only on evidence. Research. Backtest. Implement. Every day. No exceptions. You know what your current process is? Feel. Enter. Pray. F. E. P. Feel bullish. Enter a trade. Pray it works. That's not a process. That's gambling with a TradingView subscription. RBI is the only process that works. Save this post. Tattoo it on your forearm. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily RBI breakdowns. ↓ What Claude Code actually does that your manual process can't. You can maybe test 3-5 strategy ideas per week. Manually adjusting parameters. Manually checking results. Manually writing code (badly). Claude Code tests 50-100 ideas per week. With parallel agents running simultaneously. Multiple strategies being built, tested, and validated at the same time. While you sleep. The guy in this video spends 4-8 hours a day building systems with Claude Code. Not trading. Building. Research. Backtest. Implement. Then iterate. Improve. Optimize. Every day the systems get better. Every day the edge compounds. Every day the bots get smarter. While you? You spend 4-8 hours a day staring at charts making the same mistakes you made last month. Same indicators. Same patterns. Same entries. Same losses. He's iterating forward. You're running in circles. Same 8 hours per day. Completely different outcomes. Because he's building systems. And you're feeding a casino. Stop feeding the casino. Start building the machine. Save this post and follow Himanshu Kumar for the Claude Code workflow that iterates strategies while you sleep. ↓ Jim Simons. That's the benchmark. You probably don't know who Jim Simons is. And that tells me everything about how seriously you take trading. Jim Simons. Mathematician. Founded Renaissance Technologies. Built a net worth of $31 billion. 100% from algorithmic trading. Not one single manual trade. Not one "gut feeling" entry. Not one RSI divergence. Not one "smart money concept." Algorithms. Bots. Systems. Data. $31 billion. His fund averaged 66% annual returns for over 30 years. While you're excited about making $200 on a trade that you'll give back tomorrow. The best trader in human history never placed a manual trade in his life. And you think your edge is staring at a 5-minute chart with bloodshot eyes at 2 AM? Your edge is building the system. Not being inside it. Jim Simons is the benchmark. Everything else is noise. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm building toward the same goal and showing every step publicly. ↓ What you need to understand about patience. This is not get-rich-overnight. The guy in this video says it directly: "This channel is not for people looking to get rich overnight. It's not plug and play. There are no shortcuts. If you're impatient, this probably isn't for you." And that's exactly why most people will fail at this. Because you want results now. Today. This trade. You don't want to spend a week building a bot. You don't want to paper trade for 2 weeks. You don't want to test 50 ideas to find 1 that works. You want to copy someone's bot, run it live with your rent money, and be rich by Friday. That's why you'll be broke by Friday. The guy making $2.3M spent months iterating. Testing. Failing. Rebuilding. Testing again. He was patient when you would have quit. He was calm when you would have panicked. He was consistent when you would have given up. Patience isn't just a virtue in trading. It's the only virtue. Without it, everything else fails. Impatience is the most expensive personality trait in trading. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar and learn to build systems with the patience that actually pays. ↓ The live streams where the real learning happens. The YouTube video is the trailer. The live streams are the movie. Real-time bot building. Real-time questions answered. Real code shown. Real mistakes made and fixed. Not polished highlight reels where everything works perfectly. Actual development. Where things break. Where strategies fail. Where code doesn't compile. Where the fix takes 2 hours. Because that's what real development looks like. And seeing the messy parts is more valuable than any polished tutorial. Because when your bot breaks at 3 AM, you need to know how to fix it. Not just how to celebrate when it works. The streams mix beginner and advanced. Start with how to automate trading. How to use AI for code generation. Then dive into the daily work. Claude Code. Parallel agents. Constant iteration. Live debugging. 4-8 hours of real algorithmic trading development. Live. Uncut. No filter. Most "trading education" shows you the wins. This shows you the work. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the stream schedules and breakdowns. ↓ The belief that changes everything. Code is the greatest equalizer. Not money. Not connections. Not a degree. Not where you grew up. Not what school you went to. Code. Once you can build systems, you can build anything. For the rest of your life. A trading bot today. A SaaS product tomorrow. An automation business next month. A completely different life next year. The skill isn't "algorithmic trading." The skill is building systems. And that skill transfers to everything. The guy who can build a trading bot can also build a lead gen tool. Can also build a content pipeline. Can also build a SaaS product. Can also build literally anything that runs on logic and code. One skill. Infinite applications. And AI makes learning it 100x easier than it was 5 years ago. You don't need to be smart. You don't need talent. You need Claude Code and the willingness to sit down and build something instead of consuming content about building something. Building is the skill. Everything else is entertainment disguised as education. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm showing you how to build, not just how to watch. ↓ If any of this applies to you, pay attention. If you've lost money from overtrading. If you've been liquidated. If you know trading is the vehicle but manual execution keeps crashing you. If you've tried "being more disciplined" and it never lasted more than a week. If you keep saying "next month I'll start automating." If you've spent more money on courses than you've made from trading. There is a better way. It's not a magic indicator. It's not a signal group. It's not a $997 mentorship from a guy who makes money teaching, not trading. It's building your own system. A system that trades without emotion. A system that follows rules without exception. A system that runs while you sleep. A system that compounds while you live your life. That's the answer. It's always been the answer. You've just been too scared to accept that the solution requires building something instead of buying something. ↓ What the next 30 days look like if you actually commit. Week 1: Watch the video. Learn Claude Code basics. Build your first simple strategy. Run your first backtest. Week 2: Iterate. Let Claude improve the strategy. Run Monte Carlo validation. Paper trade. Week 3: Go live with $50-100. Tiny positions. Watch every trade. Compare to paper results. Week 4: Scale based on evidence. Not based on excitement. Not based on one good day. Based on data. 30 days from now you either have a running bot that trades without your emotions destroying every position. Or you're exactly where you are right now. Reading another post. Making another promise. Breaking it by Tuesday. Same 30 days either way. Different actions. Different results. Different life. ↓ Full video tutorial attached. Live bot building with Claude Code. From zero to running Polymarket trading bot. Every line of code. Every decision explained. The video is free. Claude Code is available now. The market is open 24/7. The only thing standing between you and a profitable trading bot is the same thing that's been standing there for months. You. Get out of your own way. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily AI trading bot breakdowns, live build sessions, and the full RBI process. Save this post. Watch the video. Build the bot. Or keep trading manually and keep losing. The choice has never been easier. And you've never been more stubborn about making the wrong one.
18:53

Made $530,000 with Ai Bot that started with $313. Didn't know how to code. Now this bots run 24/7 printing money while sleeping. I've made the exact step-by-step guide to build this Claude Code Polymarket trading bot. Prompts. Code. Risk settings. Paper trading checklist. Everything from zero to running bot. It's free. For 24 hours. After that I'm charging $499 for it. To grab it right now: 1. Comment "Claude Bot" 2. Like and Retweet this post 3. Follow me Himanshu Kumar ( I can't send DMs to non-followers ) I'm DMing everyone who Complete the 3 steps. I spent hundreds of thousands hiring developers because he was too scared to learn. Then learned Claude Code. Built algorithmic trading systems. $313 → $530,000. You have the same tools available right now. And you're using them to ask ChatGPT for Instagram captions. This attached video is a goldmine. Full live walkthrough. Claude Code building actual Polymarket trading bots. From zero. Every line of code. Every decision explained. Now let me break down why everything you're doing in trading is wrong and exactly how to fix it. Save this post. You'll hate yourself if you lose it. ↓ Let's start with why you keep losing money. You already know the answer. You just won't admit it. You overtrade. Every. Single. Day. You see a candle move. You feel something. You enter. No plan. No edge. No reason. Just feelings. Then it goes against you. You feel something else. Panic. Anger. Denial. You move your stop loss. Or you didn't set one at all. "It'll come back." It doesn't come back. So you take another trade. A revenge trade. Bigger size this time. Because you need to "make it back." That one fails too. Now you're emotional. Now you're tilted. Now you're using leverage you have no business touching. 40x. 50x. 100x. On a trade you entered because a candle looked "bullish" and some guy on Twitter said "send it." You get liquidated. Close the laptop. Punch something. Tell yourself you'll be "more disciplined" tomorrow. Tomorrow comes. Same cycle. Same result. Same liquidation. You've been doing this for months. Maybe years. And you still think the problem is your strategy. The problem isn't your strategy. The problem is you. Save this post right now. What I'm about to show you is the only way to remove yourself from the equation. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss any of this. ↓ Here's what's actually killing your account. It's not the market. The market doesn't care about you. It's not your indicators. RSI works fine. MACD works fine. They all "work." It's not your timeframe. It's not your broker. It's not the "manipulation." It's four things: 1. Emotions. You hold losers because hope feels better than loss. You cut winners because fear feels stronger than greed. You size up when angry. You skip trades when scared. Your emotional state determines your position size. That's insane. And you know it's insane. But you keep doing it. 2. Overtrading. You take 15 trades a day. Maybe 5 of them had actual setups. The other 10 were boredom. Boredom trades are the most expensive hobby in human history. 3. Leverage. You use 20x-50x on trades where you're not even sure about the direction. That's not trading. That's a casino with a nicer interface. 4. Fees. You're smashing market orders. Paying spread. Paying commission. On 15 trades a day. Your broker makes more money from your account than you do. Think about that. Your broker is profitable on your account. You're not. You're the product. Not the trader. These four things are why 90% of traders lose. Not bad luck. Not the market. You. Save this post and follow Himanshu Kumar because the solution is coming next. ↓ The solution is painfully obvious. Remove yourself from the equation. Not partially. Not "I'll be more disciplined." Not "I'll journal my trades." Not "I'll meditate before trading." Completely remove yourself. Build a bot. Let the bot trade. You go live your life. The bot doesn't feel emotions. The bot doesn't overtrade. The bot doesn't use reckless leverage. The bot doesn't smash market orders and bleed fees. The bot follows the rules. Every single time. Without exception. Without "just this once." Without "I have a feeling about this one." Rules in. Execution out. No human in the middle to mess everything up. That's algorithmic trading. And before your ego jumps in with "but I'm different, I have discipline" — No you don't. Your account balance proves you don't. If you had discipline, your account would be green. It's not. So you don't. Accept it. Automate it. Move on. This is the hardest truth in trading. Your discipline will always fail. A bot's won't. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the exact bot setup that removes your emotions permanently. ↓ "But I don't know how to code." Neither did he. The guy in this video didn't know how to code for most of his life. Got held back in 7th grade. People counted him out early. Spent years building apps and SaaS businesses without writing a single line of code. Hired developers on Upwork instead. Spent hundreds of thousands of dollars paying other people to build what he could have built himself. Because he was scared to learn. That fear cost him years. And hundreds of thousands of dollars. Sound familiar? You're doing the same thing right now. Not with developers. But with your time. You're spending thousands of hours trading manually because you're scared to learn the thing that would make trading automatic. The fear of learning to code is costing you more than any bad trade ever did. Because every month you trade manually is a month of emotional decisions, overleveraged entries, and unnecessary losses that a bot would never make. And here's the thing that should really frustrate you: AI does the hard parts now. You don't need a computer science degree. You don't need to work at a hedge fund. You don't need to be "good at math." Claude Code writes the code for you. You just need to think clearly about trading ideas. That's it. If you can describe a strategy in English, Claude can build it in Python. "I don't know how to code" stopped being a valid excuse in 2024. It's 2026. You're 2 years late on that excuse. Find a new one. Or stop making excuses entirely. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm showing you how people with zero coding experience are building profitable bots. ↓ The process that actually makes money. Three letters. R. B. I. Research. Backtest. Implement. That's it. That's the entire process. Every single day. Research: Find an idea. A pattern. A market inefficiency. Don't trade it yet. Don't even think about trading it yet. Just research it. Backtest: Test the idea against historical data. Does it work? Not "does it look good on one chart." Does it work across thousands of trades? Across different market conditions? Across in-sample AND out-of-sample data? If no, kill it. Find another idea. If yes, move to step 3. Implement: Build the bot. Deploy it. Paper trade first. Then live with small size. Scale only on evidence. Research. Backtest. Implement. Every day. No exceptions. You know what your current process is? Feel. Enter. Pray. F. E. P. Feel bullish. Enter a trade. Pray it works. That's not a process. That's gambling with a TradingView subscription. RBI is the only process that works. Save this post. Tattoo it on your forearm. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily RBI breakdowns. ↓ What Claude Code actually does that your manual process can't. You can maybe test 3-5 strategy ideas per week. Manually adjusting parameters. Manually checking results. Manually writing code (badly). Claude Code tests 50-100 ideas per week. With parallel agents running simultaneously. Multiple strategies being built, tested, and validated at the same time. While you sleep. The guy in this video spends 4-8 hours a day building systems with Claude Code. Not trading. Building. Research. Backtest. Implement. Then iterate. Improve. Optimize. Every day the systems get better. Every day the edge compounds. Every day the bots get smarter. While you? You spend 4-8 hours a day staring at charts making the same mistakes you made last month. Same indicators. Same patterns. Same entries. Same losses. He's iterating forward. You're running in circles. Same 8 hours per day. Completely different outcomes. Because he's building systems. And you're feeding a casino. Stop feeding the casino. Start building the machine. Save this post and follow Himanshu Kumar for the Claude Code workflow that iterates strategies while you sleep. ↓ Jim Simons. That's the benchmark. You probably don't know who Jim Simons is. And that tells me everything about how seriously you take trading. Jim Simons. Mathematician. Founded Renaissance Technologies. Built a net worth of $31 billion. 100% from algorithmic trading. Not one single manual trade. Not one "gut feeling" entry. Not one RSI divergence. Not one "smart money concept." Algorithms. Bots. Systems. Data. $31 billion. His fund averaged 66% annual returns for over 30 years. While you're excited about making $200 on a trade that you'll give back tomorrow. The best trader in human history never placed a manual trade in his life. And you think your edge is staring at a 5-minute chart with bloodshot eyes at 2 AM? Your edge is building the system. Not being inside it. Jim Simons is the benchmark. Everything else is noise. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm building toward the same goal and showing every step publicly. ↓ What you need to understand about patience. This is not get-rich-overnight. The guy in this video says it directly: "This channel is not for people looking to get rich overnight. It's not plug and play. There are no shortcuts. If you're impatient, this probably isn't for you." And that's exactly why most people will fail at this. Because you want results now. Today. This trade. You don't want to spend a week building a bot. You don't want to paper trade for 2 weeks. You don't want to test 50 ideas to find 1 that works. You want to copy someone's bot, run it live with your rent money, and be rich by Friday. That's why you'll be broke by Friday. The guy making $2.3M spent months iterating. Testing. Failing. Rebuilding. Testing again. He was patient when you would have quit. He was calm when you would have panicked. He was consistent when you would have given up. Patience isn't just a virtue in trading. It's the only virtue. Without it, everything else fails. Impatience is the most expensive personality trait in trading. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar and learn to build systems with the patience that actually pays. ↓ The live streams where the real learning happens. The YouTube video is the trailer. The live streams are the movie. Real-time bot building. Real-time questions answered. Real code shown. Real mistakes made and fixed. Not polished highlight reels where everything works perfectly. Actual development. Where things break. Where strategies fail. Where code doesn't compile. Where the fix takes 2 hours. Because that's what real development looks like. And seeing the messy parts is more valuable than any polished tutorial. Because when your bot breaks at 3 AM, you need to know how to fix it. Not just how to celebrate when it works. The streams mix beginner and advanced. Start with how to automate trading. How to use AI for code generation. Then dive into the daily work. Claude Code. Parallel agents. Constant iteration. Live debugging. 4-8 hours of real algorithmic trading development. Live. Uncut. No filter. Most "trading education" shows you the wins. This shows you the work. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the stream schedules and breakdowns. ↓ The belief that changes everything. Code is the greatest equalizer. Not money. Not connections. Not a degree. Not where you grew up. Not what school you went to. Code. Once you can build systems, you can build anything. For the rest of your life. A trading bot today. A SaaS product tomorrow. An automation business next month. A completely different life next year. The skill isn't "algorithmic trading." The skill is building systems. And that skill transfers to everything. The guy who can build a trading bot can also build a lead gen tool. Can also build a content pipeline. Can also build a SaaS product. Can also build literally anything that runs on logic and code. One skill. Infinite applications. And AI makes learning it 100x easier than it was 5 years ago. You don't need to be smart. You don't need talent. You need Claude Code and the willingness to sit down and build something instead of consuming content about building something. Building is the skill. Everything else is entertainment disguised as education. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar because I'm showing you how to build, not just how to watch. ↓ If any of this applies to you, pay attention. If you've lost money from overtrading. If you've been liquidated. If you know trading is the vehicle but manual execution keeps crashing you. If you've tried "being more disciplined" and it never lasted more than a week. If you keep saying "next month I'll start automating." If you've spent more money on courses than you've made from trading. There is a better way. It's not a magic indicator. It's not a signal group. It's not a $997 mentorship from a guy who makes money teaching, not trading. It's building your own system. A system that trades without emotion. A system that follows rules without exception. A system that runs while you sleep. A system that compounds while you live your life. That's the answer. It's always been the answer. You've just been too scared to accept that the solution requires building something instead of buying something. ↓ What the next 30 days look like if you actually commit. Week 1: Watch the video. Learn Claude Code basics. Build your first simple strategy. Run your first backtest. Week 2: Iterate. Let Claude improve the strategy. Run Monte Carlo validation. Paper trade. Week 3: Go live with $50-100. Tiny positions. Watch every trade. Compare to paper results. Week 4: Scale based on evidence. Not based on excitement. Not based on one good day. Based on data. 30 days from now you either have a running bot that trades without your emotions destroying every position. Or you're exactly where you are right now. Reading another post. Making another promise. Breaking it by Tuesday. Same 30 days either way. Different actions. Different results. Different life. ↓ Full video tutorial attached. Live bot building with Claude Code. From zero to running Polymarket trading bot. Every line of code. Every decision explained. The video is free. Claude Code is available now. The market is open 24/7. The only thing standing between you and a profitable trading bot is the same thing that's been standing there for months. You. Get out of your own way. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily AI trading bot breakdowns, live build sessions, and the full RBI process. Save this post. Watch the video. Build the bot. Or keep trading manually and keep losing. The choice has never been easier. And you've never been more stubborn about making the wrong one.

Himanshu Kumar

37,638 次观看 • 4 个月前

Jhené Aiko’s dating history shows a clear pattern of connecting with creative men in music (especially R&B/hip-hop circles)‼️, often starting from collaborations or industry proximity, with a preference for artistic, West Coast-leaning energy‼️. Linking up with Larry June fits that pattern closely and isn’t particularly surprising‼️💯. Key relationships timeline‼️ - O’Ryan (O’Ryan Browner/Grandberry, ~2005–2008)‼️: Her first significant relationship‼️. He’s an R&B singer and Omarion’s younger brother‼️. They share daughter Namiko Love (born November 2008). This was an early industry connection through music circles‼️. - Rumored links‼️: Bow Wow around 2010 (unconfirmed)‼️ and Childish Gambino (Donald Glover) around 2013‼️ after the “Bed Peace” collaboration and video (also unconfirmed; they were linked due to creative chemistry and friendship)‼️. - Dot da Genius (Oladipo Omishore, ~2014–2016): Music producer (notable for work with artists like Kid Cudi)‼️. They dated, then eloped/married in Las Vegas in March 2016‼️. She filed for divorce later that year citing irreconcilable differences; it was finalized around 2017‼️. Short, impulsive marriage that overlapped with growing closeness to Big Sean‼️. - Big Sean (~2016–2025): The longest and most public relationship‼️. They met in 2012 as collaborators/friends at No I.D.’s studio (worked on tracks like “Beware” and “I’m Gonna Be”), stayed close through her other relationships, and went public around the time of their joint "Twenty88" project in 2016‼️. On-and-off at points (including a 2019 split)‼️, they had son Noah Hasani in November 2022‼️. Reports indicate a split in late 2025 after roughly a decade, with sources pointing to differences around marriage/commitment (she wanted more formal commitment; he did not)‼️. They appear to remain amicable co-parents‼️. - Larry June (rumors intensifying 2026): Bay Area rapper (real name Leonard Hendricks)‼️. Speculative soft-launch signals included Instagram interactions (e.g., necklace with his signature orange-slice charm alongside her kids’ names)‼️, her presence at his shows, and matching stories‼️. The August 2026 “California Dream” collaboration and music video (from his "Who Coppin" project) showed them very cozy‼️cuddling, holding hands, intimate scenes‼️which many viewed as a near-hard launch‼️. Neither has fully confirmed it publicly as of mid-August 2026, but the chemistry and timing post-Big Sean make the romance widely accepted by fans‼️. Why Larry June tracks with her history⁉️ Jhené consistently dates (or gets heavily linked to) men who operate in music as creators‼️singers, producers, rappers‼️rather than outsiders‼️. Friendships or professional chemistry often come first (classic example: years of friendship and collabs with Big Sean before romance; creative sparks with Gambino and others)‼️. She has a documented comfort with industry overlaps and moving into new connections that feel creatively aligned after periods of change‼️. Larry June’s vibe maps well onto that‼️. He’s known for laid-back, melodic, lifestyle-oriented West Coast/Bay Area rap: smooth flows, themes of organic living, health, luxury without the hard flex, California leisure, oranges as a signature motif, and a chill, self-assured, motivational-yet-relaxed energy‼️. This complements Jhené’s ethereal, introspective, spiritual, California-rooted R&B aesthetic far more than a high-drama or mismatched match would‼️. Their collab feels continuous with how she’s historically mixed personal and artistic chemistry‼️. In short, after a long public relationship with one prominent rapper (Big Sean) that began in collaboration and friendship, shifting toward another independent, lifestyle-oriented California rapper via music and visible chemistry is consistent with her track record of creative-industry partnerships‼️. The timing (post-split soft-to-hard signaling) and aesthetic fit make it feel more like a natural next chapter than a curveball‼️.
1:35

Jhené Aiko’s dating history shows a clear pattern of connecting with creative men in music (especially R&B/hip-hop circles)‼️, often starting from collaborations or industry proximity, with a preference for artistic, West Coast-leaning energy‼️. Linking up with Larry June fits that pattern closely and isn’t particularly surprising‼️💯. Key relationships timeline‼️ - O’Ryan (O’Ryan Browner/Grandberry, ~2005–2008)‼️: Her first significant relationship‼️. He’s an R&B singer and Omarion’s younger brother‼️. They share daughter Namiko Love (born November 2008). This was an early industry connection through music circles‼️. - Rumored links‼️: Bow Wow around 2010 (unconfirmed)‼️ and Childish Gambino (Donald Glover) around 2013‼️ after the “Bed Peace” collaboration and video (also unconfirmed; they were linked due to creative chemistry and friendship)‼️. - Dot da Genius (Oladipo Omishore, ~2014–2016): Music producer (notable for work with artists like Kid Cudi)‼️. They dated, then eloped/married in Las Vegas in March 2016‼️. She filed for divorce later that year citing irreconcilable differences; it was finalized around 2017‼️. Short, impulsive marriage that overlapped with growing closeness to Big Sean‼️. - Big Sean (~2016–2025): The longest and most public relationship‼️. They met in 2012 as collaborators/friends at No I.D.’s studio (worked on tracks like “Beware” and “I’m Gonna Be”), stayed close through her other relationships, and went public around the time of their joint "Twenty88" project in 2016‼️. On-and-off at points (including a 2019 split)‼️, they had son Noah Hasani in November 2022‼️. Reports indicate a split in late 2025 after roughly a decade, with sources pointing to differences around marriage/commitment (she wanted more formal commitment; he did not)‼️. They appear to remain amicable co-parents‼️. - Larry June (rumors intensifying 2026): Bay Area rapper (real name Leonard Hendricks)‼️. Speculative soft-launch signals included Instagram interactions (e.g., necklace with his signature orange-slice charm alongside her kids’ names)‼️, her presence at his shows, and matching stories‼️. The August 2026 “California Dream” collaboration and music video (from his "Who Coppin" project) showed them very cozy‼️cuddling, holding hands, intimate scenes‼️which many viewed as a near-hard launch‼️. Neither has fully confirmed it publicly as of mid-August 2026, but the chemistry and timing post-Big Sean make the romance widely accepted by fans‼️. Why Larry June tracks with her history⁉️ Jhené consistently dates (or gets heavily linked to) men who operate in music as creators‼️singers, producers, rappers‼️rather than outsiders‼️. Friendships or professional chemistry often come first (classic example: years of friendship and collabs with Big Sean before romance; creative sparks with Gambino and others)‼️. She has a documented comfort with industry overlaps and moving into new connections that feel creatively aligned after periods of change‼️. Larry June’s vibe maps well onto that‼️. He’s known for laid-back, melodic, lifestyle-oriented West Coast/Bay Area rap: smooth flows, themes of organic living, health, luxury without the hard flex, California leisure, oranges as a signature motif, and a chill, self-assured, motivational-yet-relaxed energy‼️. This complements Jhené’s ethereal, introspective, spiritual, California-rooted R&B aesthetic far more than a high-drama or mismatched match would‼️. Their collab feels continuous with how she’s historically mixed personal and artistic chemistry‼️. In short, after a long public relationship with one prominent rapper (Big Sean) that began in collaboration and friendship, shifting toward another independent, lifestyle-oriented California rapper via music and visible chemistry is consistent with her track record of creative-industry partnerships‼️. The timing (post-split soft-to-hard signaling) and aesthetic fit make it feel more like a natural next chapter than a curveball‼️.

(st_ides)

44,084 次观看 • 10 天前

HERMES AGENT LEARNS FROM ITS OWN MISTAKES. UPDATES ITS MEMORY. CREATES ITS OWN SKILLS. NO CLOUD. EVERYTHING STORED LOCALLY. THIS IS HOW THE SELF-IMPROVING LOOP WORKS. most agents start from zero every session. Hermes carries forward what it learned. THREE MEMORY SYSTEMS: 1. PROCEDURAL MEMORY (how to act) stored in ~/.hermes/skills/ as SKILL.md files. when the agent repeats a complex workflow, it saves the procedure as a reusable skill. next time the same task comes up, it follows the skill instead of figuring it out again. you can also create skills explicitly: "create a skill called video-prep that captures how I format my video scripts. spoken english, define jargon inline, no em-dashes, close with a catchphrase." the agent writes the SKILL.md. available as a slash command from that moment. Hermes ships with 90+ skills. the number grows the longer you use it. 2. SEMANTIC MEMORY (durable facts about you) stored in ~/.hermes/memory/memory.md the agent scans conversations for facts worth remembering. preferences, habits, corrections, project details. real example from the video: agent tried to scrape a YouTube channel. URL was wrong. it failed. it updated memory.md with the correct URL pattern so it never makes the same mistake again. you can also save explicitly: "save to memory that my favorite testing framework is pytest" the agent updates memory.md immediately. this file loads into context on every session. the agent knows you better every week. 3. EPISODIC MEMORY (chat history) stored in ~/.hermes/state.db (local SQLite). every conversation. every tool call. every result. searchable with FTS5 full-text search. "search our past sessions. what was the first thing I ever said to you?" the agent queries state.db and finds it. over time, auxiliary models consolidate episodic memory into semantic memory. distilling recurring patterns into durable facts. THE SELF-IMPROVING LOOP: every agent run follows this cycle: → you send a prompt → working memory loads: SOUL.md + memory.md + relevant skills + chat history → agent calls tools (terminal, browser, delegate_task) → agent completes the task, replies to you → AFTER the reply: agent checks "did I learn something worth saving?" → if yes: updates memory.md or creates a new skill → next session starts smarter than the last this happens automatically. you don't ask the agent to learn. it decides what to remember on its own. WHAT MAKES THIS DIFFERENT FROM CLAUDE CODE: Claude Code has memory too. but Hermes stores everything locally. no cloud. your data never leaves your machine. Claude Code doesn't auto-create skills from experience. Hermes turns repeated workflows into reusable procedures. Claude Code memory is instruction-based. Hermes memory is conversational and self-updating. over months of usage, Hermes builds a knowledge base of your preferences, your projects, your mistakes, and the procedures that work for your specific workflow. the agent that remembers your birthday also remembers why your last deploy failed. NO EMBEDDINGS. PLAIN TEXT. Hermes does not use embeddings or RAG for memory. skill and memory search runs on plain text keyword matching. simpler. faster. no vector database to maintain. works entirely offline on your local machine. DELEGATE TO CLAUDE CODE: Hermes can spawn a sub-agent that runs Claude Code in headless mode: "spawn a sub-agent using Claude CLI to build a Python script that fetches the top 5 Hacker News stories to markdown." Hermes delegates. Claude Code writes the code. result returns to Hermes. Hermes runs the script and delivers the output. use Hermes for orchestration. use Claude Code for heavy coding. both tools. not competitors. WHAT HERMES DOES NOT HAVE: no built-in eval or LMOps system. no LangSmith, no LangFuse integration out of the box. trajectory export and logs exist but there is no automated quality tracking. if you need eval, build it yourself or connect external tools. the loop is self-improving. measuring how well it improves is on you. comment LOOP and I'll send you the configs that control how fast Hermes learns and what it remembers. memory limits, skill auto-creation triggers, and the auxiliary model that runs the learning. Replace your entire team with 8 hermes agents👇
20:54

HERMES AGENT LEARNS FROM ITS OWN MISTAKES. UPDATES ITS MEMORY. CREATES ITS OWN SKILLS. NO CLOUD. EVERYTHING STORED LOCALLY. THIS IS HOW THE SELF-IMPROVING LOOP WORKS. most agents start from zero every session. Hermes carries forward what it learned. THREE MEMORY SYSTEMS: 1. PROCEDURAL MEMORY (how to act) stored in ~/.hermes/skills/ as SKILL.md files. when the agent repeats a complex workflow, it saves the procedure as a reusable skill. next time the same task comes up, it follows the skill instead of figuring it out again. you can also create skills explicitly: "create a skill called video-prep that captures how I format my video scripts. spoken english, define jargon inline, no em-dashes, close with a catchphrase." the agent writes the SKILL.md. available as a slash command from that moment. Hermes ships with 90+ skills. the number grows the longer you use it. 2. SEMANTIC MEMORY (durable facts about you) stored in ~/.hermes/memory/memory.md the agent scans conversations for facts worth remembering. preferences, habits, corrections, project details. real example from the video: agent tried to scrape a YouTube channel. URL was wrong. it failed. it updated memory.md with the correct URL pattern so it never makes the same mistake again. you can also save explicitly: "save to memory that my favorite testing framework is pytest" the agent updates memory.md immediately. this file loads into context on every session. the agent knows you better every week. 3. EPISODIC MEMORY (chat history) stored in ~/.hermes/state.db (local SQLite). every conversation. every tool call. every result. searchable with FTS5 full-text search. "search our past sessions. what was the first thing I ever said to you?" the agent queries state.db and finds it. over time, auxiliary models consolidate episodic memory into semantic memory. distilling recurring patterns into durable facts. THE SELF-IMPROVING LOOP: every agent run follows this cycle: → you send a prompt → working memory loads: SOUL.md + memory.md + relevant skills + chat history → agent calls tools (terminal, browser, delegate_task) → agent completes the task, replies to you → AFTER the reply: agent checks "did I learn something worth saving?" → if yes: updates memory.md or creates a new skill → next session starts smarter than the last this happens automatically. you don't ask the agent to learn. it decides what to remember on its own. WHAT MAKES THIS DIFFERENT FROM CLAUDE CODE: Claude Code has memory too. but Hermes stores everything locally. no cloud. your data never leaves your machine. Claude Code doesn't auto-create skills from experience. Hermes turns repeated workflows into reusable procedures. Claude Code memory is instruction-based. Hermes memory is conversational and self-updating. over months of usage, Hermes builds a knowledge base of your preferences, your projects, your mistakes, and the procedures that work for your specific workflow. the agent that remembers your birthday also remembers why your last deploy failed. NO EMBEDDINGS. PLAIN TEXT. Hermes does not use embeddings or RAG for memory. skill and memory search runs on plain text keyword matching. simpler. faster. no vector database to maintain. works entirely offline on your local machine. DELEGATE TO CLAUDE CODE: Hermes can spawn a sub-agent that runs Claude Code in headless mode: "spawn a sub-agent using Claude CLI to build a Python script that fetches the top 5 Hacker News stories to markdown." Hermes delegates. Claude Code writes the code. result returns to Hermes. Hermes runs the script and delivers the output. use Hermes for orchestration. use Claude Code for heavy coding. both tools. not competitors. WHAT HERMES DOES NOT HAVE: no built-in eval or LMOps system. no LangSmith, no LangFuse integration out of the box. trajectory export and logs exist but there is no automated quality tracking. if you need eval, build it yourself or connect external tools. the loop is self-improving. measuring how well it improves is on you. comment LOOP and I'll send you the configs that control how fast Hermes learns and what it remembers. memory limits, skill auto-creation triggers, and the auxiliary model that runs the learning. Replace your entire team with 8 hermes agents👇

YanXbt

22,720 次观看 • 1 个月前

Everyone is exhausted. This is not a metaphor or a generational complaint. It is a clinical and measurable reality that spans every culture and every economic class. In China, young people call it tang ping, or “lying flat,” a deliberate withdrawal from the achievement treadmill. In Japan, karoshi is a legally recognized cause of death, meaning “worked to death.” In Korea, fertility has collapsed to the lowest rate on earth because an entire generation has decided the grind is not worth reproducing into. In America, deaths of despair have driven life expectancy backward for the first time in a century. Quiet quitting. Let it rot. The Great Resignation. These are not trends. They are symptoms of a global labor force that has reached the end of its tolerance. Capitalism is not satisfied with the limitations of human flesh, and our bodies are in open revolt. Something fundamental is breaking, and it is worth naming plainly. For the past two centuries, labor has been the primary mechanism by which modern economies distribute resources to households. You work for a firm, you receive wages, you use those wages to participate in the economy. This arrangement was never a law of nature. It was a system designed to solve a particular problem at a particular moment in history, and it worked reasonably well for a long time. It is not working anymore. Wages in the United States decoupled from productivity growth in the early 1970s. Since then, economic output has continued to climb while median household income has remained essentially flat. The gains have flowed to capital owners while workers have absorbed the stress and stagnation. Meanwhile, automation has steadily displaced human labor across sector after sector. Manufacturing employment peaked decades ago. Retail is hollowing out. White-collar work is now facing the same pressure from AI that blue-collar work faced from robotics. This is not a policy debate about whether automation is good or bad. It is an observation about a trajectory that is already underway and accelerating. The reason we struggle to talk about this clearly is that we have inherited a set of beliefs about labor that have nothing to do with economics. We have been told that work is sacred. That labor builds character and idleness corrupts the soul. That anyone who does not want to work is morally defective. These ideas feel like common sense, but they are not ancient wisdom. They are the residue of a specific theological tradition, namely the Protestant work ethic that emerged in the 16th century and fused with capitalism over the following centuries. We have mistaken a historical artifact for a natural law. It is time to stop fetishizing labor. It is time to stop sacralizing the sacrifice of our time, our bodies, our health, and our sanity to enrich others. Young people are already rejecting this. “I do not dream of labor” has become a widespread sentiment, not because this generation is lazy, but because they can see what older generations have rationalized away. The deal is bad and getting worse. The fetishization of work as a moral good serves the interests of those who benefit from cheap and compliant labor. It does not serve the people doing the work. Before any productive conversation about the future can happen, this fetish has to be named and dismantled. The difficulty is that both the political left and the political right remain committed to defending labor, even as the ground shifts beneath them. On the right, the defense takes the form of bootstrap mythology and warnings about welfare dependency. Work builds character. Idle hands invite trouble. A strong society requires productive citizens, and productivity is measured in hours exchanged for wages. This position treats labor as a disciplinary institution as much as an economic one. On the left, the defense is more sympathetic but equally stuck. The focus falls on dignified work, living wages, job guarantees, and union solidarity. These are responses to the genuine brutality of labor under capitalism, but they share an underlying assumption with the right. Both positions treat labor as the foundation of economic life, something to be reformed or protected rather than transcended. I call this shared ideology laborism. It is the belief that human labor must be preserved as an economic necessity, a moral virtue, or a foundation for identity. Laborism spans the political spectrum. It unites people who agree on almost nothing else. And it has become the primary obstacle to honest thinking about what comes next. Once automation reaches the point where machines can perform most human labor better, faster, cheaper, and safer, the laborist position becomes untenable. At that point, insisting that humans must continue working is not a defense of dignity. It is a demand that people perform unnecessary suffering for ideological reasons. I am proposing something simple. L/0. Labor-zero. The elimination of obligatory human labor. This does not mean the elimination of work. It means the elimination of compulsion. People will continue to create, to build, to care for each other, to solve problems, to pursue mastery. What disappears is work performed under threat of deprivation. The difference between chosen work and coerced work is the difference between exercise and forced labor. One is life-enhancing. The other is a condition we have historically recognized as a form of bondage. We call it “wage slavery” for a reason. The goal of L/0 is a world where no one has to work to survive. Where contribution is voluntary and intrinsic rather than extracted through economic desperation. This is not a utopian fantasy. It is a design problem with identifiable components and measurable progress. The coalition for this goal already exists. It just does not recognize itself yet. Consider who actually wants labor to end. On one side, you have capital. Corporations have spent the last century trying to reduce labor costs through every available means. Offshoring, automation, gig classification, union suppression. The ideal business from a pure capital perspective has zero employees and infinite output. This is not a conspiracy theory. It is the explicit optimization target of every efficiency-focused enterprise. On the other side, you have workers. Not the abstract proletariat of Marxist theory, but actual burned-out humans who fantasize about quitting, who dread Monday mornings, who experience their jobs as something to be endured rather than enjoyed. The lying flat movement, the antiwork forums, the quiet quitting phenomenon. These are not expressions of laziness. They are rational responses to a system that extracts maximum effort for diminishing returns. Capital and labor are usually framed as adversaries. But on the question of whether human labor should continue to exist as an obligation, their interests converge. The capitalist does not want to manage humans. The worker does not want to be managed. Both would prefer a world where the machines do the work and humans do something else. The conflict between capital and labor is real, but it is a conflict over the terms of the transition, not the destination. Who captures the gains from automation? How is ownership distributed? What happens to the people displaced in the process? These are genuine fights worth having. But they are negotiations within a shared frame, not a war between incompatible visions. Here is the opportunity that L/0 names. Neither side wants this marriage anymore. Capital does not want the overhead, the liability, the HR departments, the labor disputes, the inefficiency of human workers. Labor does not want the compulsion, the precarity, the alarm clocks, the performance reviews, the quiet desperation of trading irreplaceable time for replaceable wages. We are ready for a divorce. Let’s get this acrimonious arrangement behind us. The productive move is to acknowledge this honestly, sign the papers, and start negotiating the separation agreement. The fight over wages was always zero-sum. Every dollar paid to workers was a dollar not captured as profit, and vice versa. But the negotiation over ownership of automated production is positive-sum. Capitalists need consumers with money to spend or their markets collapse. Workers need income decoupled from employment or they starve. Both sides get what they want if the transition is designed correctly. This is not idealism. It is alignment of incentives. The path forward is not mysterious. Economists have understood for decades that the answer to technological unemployment is broadened capital participation. If wages are no longer the primary mechanism for distributing economic gains, then ownership must take their place. Instead of trading hours for dollars, households participate directly in the productive capacity of the automated economy. This can take many forms. Sovereign wealth funds that distribute automation dividends to citizens. Expanded employee stock ownership plans. Universal basic capital grants. Public equity stakes in AI and robotics firms that use public infrastructure and public data. The policy mechanisms are not speculative. Norway has a sovereign wealth fund worth over a trillion dollars that provides direct benefits to its citizens from oil revenues. Alaska has distributed oil dividends to residents for decades. Singapore has a system of mandatory savings and public investment that gives citizens a stake in national prosperity. These are not radical experiments. They are proven models operating at national scale. And there are thousands of such programs around the world. What is missing is not economic theory. What is missing is the political will to implement these mechanisms, the narrative infrastructure to make them seem inevitable rather than radical, and the coalition to demand them. That is what L/0 exists to build. This is an invitation. If you are building the automation and wondering who is thinking about the social transition, this is for you. If you are burned out and know that “find a better job” is not a solution to a systemic problem, this is for you. If you have been called lazy for refusing to pretend the treadmill leads somewhere, this is for you. If you run a company and understand that your future customers need income even after your company stops hiring, this is for you. L/0 is not a political party or a policy platform. It is a coalition and a direction. The work is ongoing through the Post-Labor Economics project, which addresses the specific mechanisms of transition. The conversation is happening in public, and it is open to anyone who understands that the current arrangement is ending and wants to participate in designing what comes next. The goal is simple. Eliminate obligatory labor. Distribute ownership broadly. Let humans do what humans do when they are not forced to sell their time to survive. Liberate humanity from drudgery so that we can all reach our maximum potential.
2:04

Everyone is exhausted. This is not a metaphor or a generational complaint. It is a clinical and measurable reality that spans every culture and every economic class. In China, young people call it tang ping, or “lying flat,” a deliberate withdrawal from the achievement treadmill. In Japan, karoshi is a legally recognized cause of death, meaning “worked to death.” In Korea, fertility has collapsed to the lowest rate on earth because an entire generation has decided the grind is not worth reproducing into. In America, deaths of despair have driven life expectancy backward for the first time in a century. Quiet quitting. Let it rot. The Great Resignation. These are not trends. They are symptoms of a global labor force that has reached the end of its tolerance. Capitalism is not satisfied with the limitations of human flesh, and our bodies are in open revolt. Something fundamental is breaking, and it is worth naming plainly. For the past two centuries, labor has been the primary mechanism by which modern economies distribute resources to households. You work for a firm, you receive wages, you use those wages to participate in the economy. This arrangement was never a law of nature. It was a system designed to solve a particular problem at a particular moment in history, and it worked reasonably well for a long time. It is not working anymore. Wages in the United States decoupled from productivity growth in the early 1970s. Since then, economic output has continued to climb while median household income has remained essentially flat. The gains have flowed to capital owners while workers have absorbed the stress and stagnation. Meanwhile, automation has steadily displaced human labor across sector after sector. Manufacturing employment peaked decades ago. Retail is hollowing out. White-collar work is now facing the same pressure from AI that blue-collar work faced from robotics. This is not a policy debate about whether automation is good or bad. It is an observation about a trajectory that is already underway and accelerating. The reason we struggle to talk about this clearly is that we have inherited a set of beliefs about labor that have nothing to do with economics. We have been told that work is sacred. That labor builds character and idleness corrupts the soul. That anyone who does not want to work is morally defective. These ideas feel like common sense, but they are not ancient wisdom. They are the residue of a specific theological tradition, namely the Protestant work ethic that emerged in the 16th century and fused with capitalism over the following centuries. We have mistaken a historical artifact for a natural law. It is time to stop fetishizing labor. It is time to stop sacralizing the sacrifice of our time, our bodies, our health, and our sanity to enrich others. Young people are already rejecting this. “I do not dream of labor” has become a widespread sentiment, not because this generation is lazy, but because they can see what older generations have rationalized away. The deal is bad and getting worse. The fetishization of work as a moral good serves the interests of those who benefit from cheap and compliant labor. It does not serve the people doing the work. Before any productive conversation about the future can happen, this fetish has to be named and dismantled. The difficulty is that both the political left and the political right remain committed to defending labor, even as the ground shifts beneath them. On the right, the defense takes the form of bootstrap mythology and warnings about welfare dependency. Work builds character. Idle hands invite trouble. A strong society requires productive citizens, and productivity is measured in hours exchanged for wages. This position treats labor as a disciplinary institution as much as an economic one. On the left, the defense is more sympathetic but equally stuck. The focus falls on dignified work, living wages, job guarantees, and union solidarity. These are responses to the genuine brutality of labor under capitalism, but they share an underlying assumption with the right. Both positions treat labor as the foundation of economic life, something to be reformed or protected rather than transcended. I call this shared ideology laborism. It is the belief that human labor must be preserved as an economic necessity, a moral virtue, or a foundation for identity. Laborism spans the political spectrum. It unites people who agree on almost nothing else. And it has become the primary obstacle to honest thinking about what comes next. Once automation reaches the point where machines can perform most human labor better, faster, cheaper, and safer, the laborist position becomes untenable. At that point, insisting that humans must continue working is not a defense of dignity. It is a demand that people perform unnecessary suffering for ideological reasons. I am proposing something simple. L/0. Labor-zero. The elimination of obligatory human labor. This does not mean the elimination of work. It means the elimination of compulsion. People will continue to create, to build, to care for each other, to solve problems, to pursue mastery. What disappears is work performed under threat of deprivation. The difference between chosen work and coerced work is the difference between exercise and forced labor. One is life-enhancing. The other is a condition we have historically recognized as a form of bondage. We call it “wage slavery” for a reason. The goal of L/0 is a world where no one has to work to survive. Where contribution is voluntary and intrinsic rather than extracted through economic desperation. This is not a utopian fantasy. It is a design problem with identifiable components and measurable progress. The coalition for this goal already exists. It just does not recognize itself yet. Consider who actually wants labor to end. On one side, you have capital. Corporations have spent the last century trying to reduce labor costs through every available means. Offshoring, automation, gig classification, union suppression. The ideal business from a pure capital perspective has zero employees and infinite output. This is not a conspiracy theory. It is the explicit optimization target of every efficiency-focused enterprise. On the other side, you have workers. Not the abstract proletariat of Marxist theory, but actual burned-out humans who fantasize about quitting, who dread Monday mornings, who experience their jobs as something to be endured rather than enjoyed. The lying flat movement, the antiwork forums, the quiet quitting phenomenon. These are not expressions of laziness. They are rational responses to a system that extracts maximum effort for diminishing returns. Capital and labor are usually framed as adversaries. But on the question of whether human labor should continue to exist as an obligation, their interests converge. The capitalist does not want to manage humans. The worker does not want to be managed. Both would prefer a world where the machines do the work and humans do something else. The conflict between capital and labor is real, but it is a conflict over the terms of the transition, not the destination. Who captures the gains from automation? How is ownership distributed? What happens to the people displaced in the process? These are genuine fights worth having. But they are negotiations within a shared frame, not a war between incompatible visions. Here is the opportunity that L/0 names. Neither side wants this marriage anymore. Capital does not want the overhead, the liability, the HR departments, the labor disputes, the inefficiency of human workers. Labor does not want the compulsion, the precarity, the alarm clocks, the performance reviews, the quiet desperation of trading irreplaceable time for replaceable wages. We are ready for a divorce. Let’s get this acrimonious arrangement behind us. The productive move is to acknowledge this honestly, sign the papers, and start negotiating the separation agreement. The fight over wages was always zero-sum. Every dollar paid to workers was a dollar not captured as profit, and vice versa. But the negotiation over ownership of automated production is positive-sum. Capitalists need consumers with money to spend or their markets collapse. Workers need income decoupled from employment or they starve. Both sides get what they want if the transition is designed correctly. This is not idealism. It is alignment of incentives. The path forward is not mysterious. Economists have understood for decades that the answer to technological unemployment is broadened capital participation. If wages are no longer the primary mechanism for distributing economic gains, then ownership must take their place. Instead of trading hours for dollars, households participate directly in the productive capacity of the automated economy. This can take many forms. Sovereign wealth funds that distribute automation dividends to citizens. Expanded employee stock ownership plans. Universal basic capital grants. Public equity stakes in AI and robotics firms that use public infrastructure and public data. The policy mechanisms are not speculative. Norway has a sovereign wealth fund worth over a trillion dollars that provides direct benefits to its citizens from oil revenues. Alaska has distributed oil dividends to residents for decades. Singapore has a system of mandatory savings and public investment that gives citizens a stake in national prosperity. These are not radical experiments. They are proven models operating at national scale. And there are thousands of such programs around the world. What is missing is not economic theory. What is missing is the political will to implement these mechanisms, the narrative infrastructure to make them seem inevitable rather than radical, and the coalition to demand them. That is what L/0 exists to build. This is an invitation. If you are building the automation and wondering who is thinking about the social transition, this is for you. If you are burned out and know that “find a better job” is not a solution to a systemic problem, this is for you. If you have been called lazy for refusing to pretend the treadmill leads somewhere, this is for you. If you run a company and understand that your future customers need income even after your company stops hiring, this is for you. L/0 is not a political party or a policy platform. It is a coalition and a direction. The work is ongoing through the Post-Labor Economics project, which addresses the specific mechanisms of transition. The conversation is happening in public, and it is open to anyone who understands that the current arrangement is ending and wants to participate in designing what comes next. The goal is simple. Eliminate obligatory labor. Distribute ownership broadly. Let humans do what humans do when they are not forced to sell their time to survive. Liberate humanity from drudgery so that we can all reach our maximum potential.

David Shapiro (L/0)

64,004 次观看 • 7 个月前

On Zero 10 at Art Basel 2026 When I heard Zero 10 was coming to Art Basel, the first thing I felt wasn't curiosity about the art. It was the chance to finally stand in a room with people I'd only ever known through a screen and talk about where our space actually is right now. I went in wearing two hats and trying to keep both on at once. One was the curious visitor: how does digital art even get communicated inside an institution like this? The other I can't take off. Someone who comes from the underground core of this scene. I made myself a promise on the way in. No "fuck this, it's all cringe." Neutral. Open. Give it everything before I judge anything. And for a while, it earned that. The first thing Zero 10 gets right is that it doesn't feel like a side fair, even though that's exactly what it is. Visually it holds the moment. Without saying it out loud, it tells you Art Basel is serious about this now. Not dabbling, not hedging its bets. The first works I saw were John Gerrard's triptych of flags, and they set the tone instantly. They're gorgeous. Someone walking in cold might not even clock them as simulations. They might think they're looking at a live feed. That's the point. The room opens by declaring, in the most aesthetic way possible: *this is the zeitgeist of digital art.* Hold onto that sentence. I'll come back to it. Walking through, I slowly understood what Eli Scheinman and Trevor Paglen were actually doing. This wasn't Miami, where every phone in the room was pointed at Beeple's robot dogs and the whole thing tipped into spectacle, which, to be fair, worked exactly as intended. Basel was something else. Didactic in the good sense. A guided walk through the history of digital art, screens and physical works, old and new, woven together until the seams disappeared. For someone like me, who has been pushing back on the flattening, the lazy reflex that files Autoglyphs and Fidenza in the same drawer as 10k flip projects, this was genuinely moving to see. Someone built a room that takes this work seriously enough to give it a lineage. That matters. I don't want to undersell how much it matters. Then I hit Avery Singer's *Shit Coin Maxi*, hung by Hauser & Wirth, and that's the exact moment something turned. It's a good title, or it was. That's almost the problem. "Shit coin" is already dead vocabulary. That word had its currency back in Cobie's peak era, and nobody current talks like that anymore. So a painting made in 2025 reaching for it reads less like the present than like nostalgia for a moment that already passed. I'm not mad at the work. I'm noting what it represents. A blue-chip painter borrowing a word that signaled "now" a couple of cycles ago, hung in the room that's claiming to show us the actual now. The strongest culture of the last few years got made by people with no institutional cover, and what makes it onto a blue-chip wall is the part already legible to the institution, smoothed down into something sellable. So the present wasn't absent from the room. It was here, absorbed, translated into a dialect the fair already understands. Which made me start looking for the other version of it. The one that hasn't been translated yet. The thing that's still hot to the touch. It wasn't there. Not a single artist or movement in the room represented the current moment on its own terms. Someone will say that's just my perspective, and fine. But let's be real. The wildest movement of the last cycle happened on Solana, through meme coins, and out of that chaos came an NFT scene with its own dynamic and a handful of genuinely outstanding artists building a language that deserves a place in the canon. Avant NFTs, Gay NFTs, tongue-licking-the-flame NFTs, whatever you want to call them. That language isn't a footnote. Read properly, it throws new light backward. It's what finally lets the 2021 work and everything before it be seen as something other than cartoon monkeys. The current scene is the key to the historical one. Leave it out and the history you're telling is missing the part that shows the conversation has moved past 2021 bag holders praying for the mass adoption where the world wakes up and decides Tyler Hobbs is sexier than Ida Ekblad. And before anyone reads this as an NFT guy asking for more NFTs: that's the reduction, and the reduction is the whole problem. What's missing isn't a market category. It's a way of working. Artists using the blockchain like a studio, not to mint jpegs but to build whole worlds, weaving AI, physical objects, writing, and community into one continuous practice instead of separate outputs. That is digital art. That is AI art. The two things this show says it's about. Which is what makes the omission strange. Zero 10 sorts everything into clean bins, AI over here, generative over there, a physical piece on the wall, exactly when the work that's most alive is the work dissolving those bins. The filing system is the tell. It organizes the present with the categories of the past. Which brings me back to that opening declaration. *This is the zeitgeist of digital art.* Except those flags weren't new. *Western Flag* dates to 2017. The newest of the three is 2023. The works chosen to announce the present were themselves already the past. Fellowship framed the triptych as a nine-year body of work, the oldest piece nearly a decade old. A zeitgeist on a delay. None of this makes the work bad, but digital culture doesn't run on museum time, and work that felt current when it was made can read as historical by the time it's framed as the now. Is it even one, then? I mean that as a real question, not a gotcha. A zeitgeist is the spirit of a time, and a spirit can only belong to the people living inside it. So what happens when the previous generation is the one interpreting what the current generation's culture looks like? Does it stay a zeitgeist, or quietly become a retrospective wearing the zeitgeist's clothes? You named the whole platform after Malevich's *0,10*, the show where Suprematism reduced everything to zero and started over. You set your own bar at rupture. And the one thing the room didn't show me was the rupture happening outside its walls. This isn't sentiment, either. The last Art Basel and UBS survey put it plainly: Millennials and Gen Z now make up roughly three-quarters of high-net-worth collectors, and more than half of those collectors bought a digital work in the past year. The new generation isn't the future of this market. It's the present tense. Defining their culture for them, from above, doesn't just feel off. It misreads the room it's standing in. So let me end where my excitement actually lives. For years, the part of Art Basel I loved most wasn't the main fair. It was Liste. The young galleries, the disruptive positions, the work that hadn't been sorted or priced or canonized yet. That's where you went to feel something. Zero 10 could be that. It has the bones to become the room that hits you awake before the main halls lull you back to sleep. The cold water before the warm bath. The place you walk through first, get rattled, feel your pulse, and only then go get comfortable. That's the highest thing I can imagine for it, and it's within reach. The frame is right. The seriousness is right. What's missing is the nerve to let the people making the present define what it looks like. Get that part right, and Zero 10 won't be showing us the zeitgeist. It'll be where the zeitgeist is.
0:20

On Zero 10 at Art Basel 2026 When I heard Zero 10 was coming to Art Basel, the first thing I felt wasn't curiosity about the art. It was the chance to finally stand in a room with people I'd only ever known through a screen and talk about where our space actually is right now. I went in wearing two hats and trying to keep both on at once. One was the curious visitor: how does digital art even get communicated inside an institution like this? The other I can't take off. Someone who comes from the underground core of this scene. I made myself a promise on the way in. No "fuck this, it's all cringe." Neutral. Open. Give it everything before I judge anything. And for a while, it earned that. The first thing Zero 10 gets right is that it doesn't feel like a side fair, even though that's exactly what it is. Visually it holds the moment. Without saying it out loud, it tells you Art Basel is serious about this now. Not dabbling, not hedging its bets. The first works I saw were John Gerrard's triptych of flags, and they set the tone instantly. They're gorgeous. Someone walking in cold might not even clock them as simulations. They might think they're looking at a live feed. That's the point. The room opens by declaring, in the most aesthetic way possible: *this is the zeitgeist of digital art.* Hold onto that sentence. I'll come back to it. Walking through, I slowly understood what Eli Scheinman and Trevor Paglen were actually doing. This wasn't Miami, where every phone in the room was pointed at Beeple's robot dogs and the whole thing tipped into spectacle, which, to be fair, worked exactly as intended. Basel was something else. Didactic in the good sense. A guided walk through the history of digital art, screens and physical works, old and new, woven together until the seams disappeared. For someone like me, who has been pushing back on the flattening, the lazy reflex that files Autoglyphs and Fidenza in the same drawer as 10k flip projects, this was genuinely moving to see. Someone built a room that takes this work seriously enough to give it a lineage. That matters. I don't want to undersell how much it matters. Then I hit Avery Singer's *Shit Coin Maxi*, hung by Hauser & Wirth, and that's the exact moment something turned. It's a good title, or it was. That's almost the problem. "Shit coin" is already dead vocabulary. That word had its currency back in Cobie's peak era, and nobody current talks like that anymore. So a painting made in 2025 reaching for it reads less like the present than like nostalgia for a moment that already passed. I'm not mad at the work. I'm noting what it represents. A blue-chip painter borrowing a word that signaled "now" a couple of cycles ago, hung in the room that's claiming to show us the actual now. The strongest culture of the last few years got made by people with no institutional cover, and what makes it onto a blue-chip wall is the part already legible to the institution, smoothed down into something sellable. So the present wasn't absent from the room. It was here, absorbed, translated into a dialect the fair already understands. Which made me start looking for the other version of it. The one that hasn't been translated yet. The thing that's still hot to the touch. It wasn't there. Not a single artist or movement in the room represented the current moment on its own terms. Someone will say that's just my perspective, and fine. But let's be real. The wildest movement of the last cycle happened on Solana, through meme coins, and out of that chaos came an NFT scene with its own dynamic and a handful of genuinely outstanding artists building a language that deserves a place in the canon. Avant NFTs, Gay NFTs, tongue-licking-the-flame NFTs, whatever you want to call them. That language isn't a footnote. Read properly, it throws new light backward. It's what finally lets the 2021 work and everything before it be seen as something other than cartoon monkeys. The current scene is the key to the historical one. Leave it out and the history you're telling is missing the part that shows the conversation has moved past 2021 bag holders praying for the mass adoption where the world wakes up and decides Tyler Hobbs is sexier than Ida Ekblad. And before anyone reads this as an NFT guy asking for more NFTs: that's the reduction, and the reduction is the whole problem. What's missing isn't a market category. It's a way of working. Artists using the blockchain like a studio, not to mint jpegs but to build whole worlds, weaving AI, physical objects, writing, and community into one continuous practice instead of separate outputs. That is digital art. That is AI art. The two things this show says it's about. Which is what makes the omission strange. Zero 10 sorts everything into clean bins, AI over here, generative over there, a physical piece on the wall, exactly when the work that's most alive is the work dissolving those bins. The filing system is the tell. It organizes the present with the categories of the past. Which brings me back to that opening declaration. *This is the zeitgeist of digital art.* Except those flags weren't new. *Western Flag* dates to 2017. The newest of the three is 2023. The works chosen to announce the present were themselves already the past. Fellowship framed the triptych as a nine-year body of work, the oldest piece nearly a decade old. A zeitgeist on a delay. None of this makes the work bad, but digital culture doesn't run on museum time, and work that felt current when it was made can read as historical by the time it's framed as the now. Is it even one, then? I mean that as a real question, not a gotcha. A zeitgeist is the spirit of a time, and a spirit can only belong to the people living inside it. So what happens when the previous generation is the one interpreting what the current generation's culture looks like? Does it stay a zeitgeist, or quietly become a retrospective wearing the zeitgeist's clothes? You named the whole platform after Malevich's *0,10*, the show where Suprematism reduced everything to zero and started over. You set your own bar at rupture. And the one thing the room didn't show me was the rupture happening outside its walls. This isn't sentiment, either. The last Art Basel and UBS survey put it plainly: Millennials and Gen Z now make up roughly three-quarters of high-net-worth collectors, and more than half of those collectors bought a digital work in the past year. The new generation isn't the future of this market. It's the present tense. Defining their culture for them, from above, doesn't just feel off. It misreads the room it's standing in. So let me end where my excitement actually lives. For years, the part of Art Basel I loved most wasn't the main fair. It was Liste. The young galleries, the disruptive positions, the work that hadn't been sorted or priced or canonized yet. That's where you went to feel something. Zero 10 could be that. It has the bones to become the room that hits you awake before the main halls lull you back to sleep. The cold water before the warm bath. The place you walk through first, get rattled, feel your pulse, and only then go get comfortable. That's the highest thing I can imagine for it, and it's within reach. The frame is right. The seriousness is right. What's missing is the nerve to let the people making the present define what it looks like. Get that part right, and Zero 10 won't be showing us the zeitgeist. It'll be where the zeitgeist is.

VVV.SO

15,724 次观看 • 2 个月前