Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

The Devil thinks he's already won... In 1831, the German artist Friedrich August Moritz Retzsch created a painting called "Checkmate." It portrays a chess game between a young man and the Devil, with the man's soul at stake. The Devil sits confidently. The young man stares at the board,...

JamesLucasIT's profile picture

James Lucas

811,765 subscribers

107,162 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

SanatEğitimBilim & Teknoloji
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

🚨The Devil thought he had "Checkmate" on this man in a painting in the Lourve Museum, France🇫🇷, BUT a Chess Master had one more move... "I looked at the devil laughing and I looked at the man in desperation." But he said, "I noticed something on the chess board." He said, "Either they're gonna have to change the painting or they're gonna have to change the name." And the guy said, "Well, why are they gonna have to do that?" He said, "Well, you know I'm a world champion chess player." And he said, "When I observed the board, I found out the King still has one more move."
2:35

🚨The Devil thought he had "Checkmate" on this man in a painting in the Lourve Museum, France🇫🇷, BUT a Chess Master had one more move... "I looked at the devil laughing and I looked at the man in desperation." But he said, "I noticed something on the chess board." He said, "Either they're gonna have to change the painting or they're gonna have to change the name." And the guy said, "Well, why are they gonna have to do that?" He said, "Well, you know I'm a world champion chess player." And he said, "When I observed the board, I found out the King still has one more move."

UAPWixy

96,368 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

In 1997 the greatest chess player who ever lived sat down against a machine, lost, and immediately accused it of cheating. IBM's answer was to switch the machine off, take it apart, and refuse to ever play him again. The match was carried on live television. IBM's market value jumped by billions in a single week. The man who lost spent years asking one question the company would never answer. His name is Garry Kasparov. The machine was Deep Blue. The footage is on YouTube. Kasparov was not just a champion. He had been the world's number one for more than fifteen years and is still argued to be the strongest player in history. In 1996 he had beaten IBM's Deep Blue with ease. IBM took it away, rebuilt it, and challenged him again in 1997 in New York, with the whole world watching. Then, in game two, the machine did something that broke him. In a position where every computer of that era would have greedily grabbed a pawn, Deep Blue quietly declined and played a slow, patient, deeply human move instead. Kasparov could not accept that a machine had chosen it. He became convinced a human grandmaster was hidden somewhere, feeding it moves. Rattled, he resigned a game that analysts later proved he could have drawn. He never recovered in the match. Deep Blue won, three and a half to two and a half. It was the first time a reigning world champion had ever lost a match to a computer. The papers called it the day the machines arrived. Kasparov demanded to see the machine's logs, the record of why it played what it played. IBM refused to release them, turned down the rematch he begged for, and quietly dismantled Deep Blue. Years later one of its own engineers admitted that an early move which had unnerved Kasparov may have come from nothing more than a bug, a meaningless fallback the champion had mistaken for genius. Nobody could ever fully settle it. The logs stayed private. This is not really a story about chess. It is about the exact moment human intuition stopped being the ceiling. For centuries the best move in any hard game was whatever the finest human mind could see. In one match a machine found a move a human could not even believe was real, and the greatest mind in the game turned his own genius into paranoia against it. Kasparov spent years bitter about it. Then he said the line that outlived the grudge: "I could feel, I could smell, a new kind of intelligence across the table." He stopped fighting the machine and started studying how humans and machines win together. That, not the loss, was the real lesson. The edge moved that day and it never moved back. It used to be intuition. It became computation. The people who win from here are not the ones with the best gut. They are the ones who stopped trusting their gut the moment the machine could out-see it. The film is free. The logs never came out. Most people will only remember that the human lost.
1:19:41

In 1997 the greatest chess player who ever lived sat down against a machine, lost, and immediately accused it of cheating. IBM's answer was to switch the machine off, take it apart, and refuse to ever play him again. The match was carried on live television. IBM's market value jumped by billions in a single week. The man who lost spent years asking one question the company would never answer. His name is Garry Kasparov. The machine was Deep Blue. The footage is on YouTube. Kasparov was not just a champion. He had been the world's number one for more than fifteen years and is still argued to be the strongest player in history. In 1996 he had beaten IBM's Deep Blue with ease. IBM took it away, rebuilt it, and challenged him again in 1997 in New York, with the whole world watching. Then, in game two, the machine did something that broke him. In a position where every computer of that era would have greedily grabbed a pawn, Deep Blue quietly declined and played a slow, patient, deeply human move instead. Kasparov could not accept that a machine had chosen it. He became convinced a human grandmaster was hidden somewhere, feeding it moves. Rattled, he resigned a game that analysts later proved he could have drawn. He never recovered in the match. Deep Blue won, three and a half to two and a half. It was the first time a reigning world champion had ever lost a match to a computer. The papers called it the day the machines arrived. Kasparov demanded to see the machine's logs, the record of why it played what it played. IBM refused to release them, turned down the rematch he begged for, and quietly dismantled Deep Blue. Years later one of its own engineers admitted that an early move which had unnerved Kasparov may have come from nothing more than a bug, a meaningless fallback the champion had mistaken for genius. Nobody could ever fully settle it. The logs stayed private. This is not really a story about chess. It is about the exact moment human intuition stopped being the ceiling. For centuries the best move in any hard game was whatever the finest human mind could see. In one match a machine found a move a human could not even believe was real, and the greatest mind in the game turned his own genius into paranoia against it. Kasparov spent years bitter about it. Then he said the line that outlived the grudge: "I could feel, I could smell, a new kind of intelligence across the table." He stopped fighting the machine and started studying how humans and machines win together. That, not the loss, was the real lesson. The edge moved that day and it never moved back. It used to be intuition. It became computation. The people who win from here are not the ones with the best gut. They are the ones who stopped trusting their gut the moment the machine could out-see it. The film is free. The logs never came out. Most people will only remember that the human lost.

Voltex

411,961 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Donald Trump told you all today that this is a chess game being played at the highest levels. Who has to make the final move in order for their to be a checkmate? Hint: It's not the Whitehats. 😎
1:32

Donald Trump told you all today that this is a chess game being played at the highest levels. Who has to make the final move in order for their to be a checkmate? Hint: It's not the Whitehats. 😎

Prolotario

1,220,008 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

This young man on the mound, a senior in high school, started the game and threw one pitch in the game on senior day. The back story is that he was injured by a line drive in March ending his career with a brain bleed. The young man up to bat is a senior and the son of the mom who filmed this. He agreed to not swing at the pitch. They said there wasn't a dry eye in the ballpark. This game is so much greater than that little white ball! In a world of such chaos and hate, I love, love, love this so much.❤️ How can you not be romantic about baseball?
0:51

This young man on the mound, a senior in high school, started the game and threw one pitch in the game on senior day. The back story is that he was injured by a line drive in March ending his career with a brain bleed. The young man up to bat is a senior and the son of the mom who filmed this. He agreed to not swing at the pitch. They said there wasn't a dry eye in the ballpark. This game is so much greater than that little white ball! In a world of such chaos and hate, I love, love, love this so much.❤️ How can you not be romantic about baseball?

👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈

1,449,038 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

They say the devil hates his servants the most. Here's why... This painting is called Allegory of Satan, or Lord of the World, painted around 1900 by the Polish artist Ludwik Stasiak. It is not the devil you might expect. There are no flames, no chaos and no horns leering out of the dark. Stasiak painted something far more unsettling. Here the devil sits enthroned like a ruler of the world, with a sardonic grin on his face, surrounded by the symbols of earthly power: wealth, ambition, domination, and death. Evil, he suggests, never arrives as something horrifying that we instantly reject. It arrives as something attractive. It looks like success. It looks like money, and status, and control. It looks like everything the world tells us to want. And that is what makes the painting feel so modern, more than a century after it was made. Stasiak was working at the turn of the twentieth century, an age obsessed, like ours, with progress and fortune and getting ahead. And he was warning that the most dangerous evil is not the kind that frightens us, but the kind that seduces us, the kind we serve willingly because it promises to make us powerful. Which brings us back to the old saying. Look closely at what lies beneath his throne. Scattered at its base are the skulls of the powerful, still wearing their crowns and their helmets in death, the very people who traded their souls for money and power. And he sits above them, amused, because the joke is on them. This is why the devil hates his servants the most. He does not respect them for serving him. He despises them for it, because they handed over the only thing that ever mattered in exchange for things that rot. That is the real power of the painting: Stasiak did not depict a devil we would run from, he painted a devil we would kneel to, and follow, and call our lord, mistaking our own chains for a crown. He was only giving form to a warning as old as the Gospels themselves: "No one can serve two masters. You cannot serve both God and money."
0:28

They say the devil hates his servants the most. Here's why... This painting is called Allegory of Satan, or Lord of the World, painted around 1900 by the Polish artist Ludwik Stasiak. It is not the devil you might expect. There are no flames, no chaos and no horns leering out of the dark. Stasiak painted something far more unsettling. Here the devil sits enthroned like a ruler of the world, with a sardonic grin on his face, surrounded by the symbols of earthly power: wealth, ambition, domination, and death. Evil, he suggests, never arrives as something horrifying that we instantly reject. It arrives as something attractive. It looks like success. It looks like money, and status, and control. It looks like everything the world tells us to want. And that is what makes the painting feel so modern, more than a century after it was made. Stasiak was working at the turn of the twentieth century, an age obsessed, like ours, with progress and fortune and getting ahead. And he was warning that the most dangerous evil is not the kind that frightens us, but the kind that seduces us, the kind we serve willingly because it promises to make us powerful. Which brings us back to the old saying. Look closely at what lies beneath his throne. Scattered at its base are the skulls of the powerful, still wearing their crowns and their helmets in death, the very people who traded their souls for money and power. And he sits above them, amused, because the joke is on them. This is why the devil hates his servants the most. He does not respect them for serving him. He despises them for it, because they handed over the only thing that ever mattered in exchange for things that rot. That is the real power of the painting: Stasiak did not depict a devil we would run from, he painted a devil we would kneel to, and follow, and call our lord, mistaking our own chains for a crown. He was only giving form to a warning as old as the Gospels themselves: "No one can serve two masters. You cannot serve both God and money."

James Lucas

195,591 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

"The way SGA performs at the end of the game needs to be studied because he turns it into a chess game.. I still think OKC is the monster in the West" Iman. #PMSLive
1:05

"The way SGA performs at the end of the game needs to be studied because he turns it into a chess game.. I still think OKC is the monster in the West" Iman. #PMSLive

Pat McAfee

82,486 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Chaturanga is an ancient Indian strategy game considered the earliest predecessor of modern chess, originating around 1,500 years ago. The game is linked to the Gupta Empire (6th century CE) and is mentioned in ancient Indian texts and epics like the Mahabharata. The way pieces moved was completely different from how they move now. The four-playered variant could be won without defeating the king. Interesting isn’t it? #Chess #Bharat
1:38

Chaturanga is an ancient Indian strategy game considered the earliest predecessor of modern chess, originating around 1,500 years ago. The game is linked to the Gupta Empire (6th century CE) and is mentioned in ancient Indian texts and epics like the Mahabharata. The way pieces moved was completely different from how they move now. The four-playered variant could be won without defeating the king. Interesting isn’t it? #Chess #Bharat

Comman Man

15,801 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

This woman called for an Uber so that she could go and visit her friend, when the Uber showed up, it wasn’t the one in the picture on the app, but it can’t be a coincidence that it was this one that showed up. A moment before it showed up, a man walked by, and seemed to circle her, once the fake Uber showed up, the man who circled her tried to force her into the car, she managed to fight them off and got away. Could the actual Uber that she was assigned to in the app have been involved in this, how else would could this have happened?
0:57

This woman called for an Uber so that she could go and visit her friend, when the Uber showed up, it wasn’t the one in the picture on the app, but it can’t be a coincidence that it was this one that showed up. A moment before it showed up, a man walked by, and seemed to circle her, once the fake Uber showed up, the man who circled her tried to force her into the car, she managed to fight them off and got away. Could the actual Uber that she was assigned to in the app have been involved in this, how else would could this have happened?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

1,004,368 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

The Royal Game of Ur .... For 4600 years, a mysterious game slept in the dust of southern Iraq, largely forgotten. The passion of a museum curator and the hunger of young Iraqis for their cultural history may bring it back.... The original name of this ancient game has been lost to time, but it was dubbed the Royal Game of Ur after a British archaeologist named Sir Leonard Woolley uncovered five worn playing boards in 1928 at the Royal Cemetery of the Sumerian city of Ur. Analysts estimated that the highly decorated boards, made of wood, inlaid shell and lapis lazuli, were made between 2600-2400 BC, making the Royal Game of Ur the oldest complete tabletop game ever discovered. Archaeological evidence suggests that the game (Game of 20 Squares) was immensely popular with people of all classes. The boards were carried all over the Middle East and sometimes scratched into clay or rock, if no board was available by soldiers, missionaries, explorers and traders, who introduced it to Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, Cyprus and Crete. Variations of the game have been found in King Tutankhamen’s tomb, and etched into pillars in the palace of the Assyrian king Sargon II. For at least 1000 years, the Royal Game of Ur was the national game of ancient Mesopotamia, but it waned in popularity as other games were developed, including those that most likely evolved from it, such as backgammon. Mentions of the game disappeared in the Middle Ages, but a variation, called Aasha, was played by the Jewish people of Kochi, in India. Jews of Kochi had migrated from ancient Babylonia and brought a version of the game with them. The 1928 discovery of the Royal Game of Ur gave scholars an important cultural glimpse into how the ancient Mesopotamians entertained themselves, but there was one problem: The boards did not come with an instruction manual, and that meant that modern-day scholars had no idea how the game worked. In 1980s, Dr. Irving Finkel (a curator and Assyriologist at British Museum), translated a cuneiform script on a crumbling clay tablet that had been brought to the museum by an antiquities dealer. The document sounded remarkably like the rules of an ancient game. The clay tablet written in 177-176 BC by a scribe named Itti-Marduk-balatu, tablet was discovered around 1880 in the ruins of Babylon, according to an academic paper written by Dr. Finkel. “The tablet included a grid on one side,” he wrote, “and two columns of closely written text on the other, adding his name and the date at the end of the inscription.” British Museum bought the relic shortly after it was found and cataloged it. Scholars tried to decipher the cuneiform over the years, but it was Dr. Finkel who was able to identify the text on the tablet as instructions on how to play the Royal Game of Ur after comparing it to the other game boards the museum had stored in its archives. Babylonian tablet revealed that the game is race between two players to get their markers around and off the board. Pyramid-shaped dice are used to indicate the number of squares a player can move, but strategy is involved as well: If a player lands on a square occupied by their opponent, they can knock that marker off, and the opponent must start over again with that piece. That can set a player back by quite a bit, and it is almost impossible to predict who will win, even near the end of the game. But there was another aspect of the game that attracted people: It was said to tell a player’s fortune. According to the cuneiform tablet, some of the marked squares on the board were assigned signs of the zodiac and, with them, predictions that a player would win a beer, make a friend, eat well, or perhaps become powerful and wealthy. #archaeohistories
1:17

The Royal Game of Ur .... For 4600 years, a mysterious game slept in the dust of southern Iraq, largely forgotten. The passion of a museum curator and the hunger of young Iraqis for their cultural history may bring it back.... The original name of this ancient game has been lost to time, but it was dubbed the Royal Game of Ur after a British archaeologist named Sir Leonard Woolley uncovered five worn playing boards in 1928 at the Royal Cemetery of the Sumerian city of Ur. Analysts estimated that the highly decorated boards, made of wood, inlaid shell and lapis lazuli, were made between 2600-2400 BC, making the Royal Game of Ur the oldest complete tabletop game ever discovered. Archaeological evidence suggests that the game (Game of 20 Squares) was immensely popular with people of all classes. The boards were carried all over the Middle East and sometimes scratched into clay or rock, if no board was available by soldiers, missionaries, explorers and traders, who introduced it to Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, Cyprus and Crete. Variations of the game have been found in King Tutankhamen’s tomb, and etched into pillars in the palace of the Assyrian king Sargon II. For at least 1000 years, the Royal Game of Ur was the national game of ancient Mesopotamia, but it waned in popularity as other games were developed, including those that most likely evolved from it, such as backgammon. Mentions of the game disappeared in the Middle Ages, but a variation, called Aasha, was played by the Jewish people of Kochi, in India. Jews of Kochi had migrated from ancient Babylonia and brought a version of the game with them. The 1928 discovery of the Royal Game of Ur gave scholars an important cultural glimpse into how the ancient Mesopotamians entertained themselves, but there was one problem: The boards did not come with an instruction manual, and that meant that modern-day scholars had no idea how the game worked. In 1980s, Dr. Irving Finkel (a curator and Assyriologist at British Museum), translated a cuneiform script on a crumbling clay tablet that had been brought to the museum by an antiquities dealer. The document sounded remarkably like the rules of an ancient game. The clay tablet written in 177-176 BC by a scribe named Itti-Marduk-balatu, tablet was discovered around 1880 in the ruins of Babylon, according to an academic paper written by Dr. Finkel. “The tablet included a grid on one side,” he wrote, “and two columns of closely written text on the other, adding his name and the date at the end of the inscription.” British Museum bought the relic shortly after it was found and cataloged it. Scholars tried to decipher the cuneiform over the years, but it was Dr. Finkel who was able to identify the text on the tablet as instructions on how to play the Royal Game of Ur after comparing it to the other game boards the museum had stored in its archives. Babylonian tablet revealed that the game is race between two players to get their markers around and off the board. Pyramid-shaped dice are used to indicate the number of squares a player can move, but strategy is involved as well: If a player lands on a square occupied by their opponent, they can knock that marker off, and the opponent must start over again with that piece. That can set a player back by quite a bit, and it is almost impossible to predict who will win, even near the end of the game. But there was another aspect of the game that attracted people: It was said to tell a player’s fortune. According to the cuneiform tablet, some of the marked squares on the board were assigned signs of the zodiac and, with them, predictions that a player would win a beer, make a friend, eat well, or perhaps become powerful and wealthy. #archaeohistories

Archaeo - Histories

17,784 görüntüleme • 6 gün önce

Once the slaughter is over, and it has to be over, there is an expectation that Palestinians should move on regardless of the lives lost, of the limbs lost, of the loved ones lost. There is an expectation that parents will walk the earth with the shadow of their killed children and do nothing about it. The children who are orphaned will hold onto the memory of their parents but not to the anger over how they were killed. There is an expectation that a nation will be able to move on from the reality of parents carrying their children’s remains in plastic bags, of families buried under the rubble or in the sand they found shelter in after everything else was destroyed. That we will be able to move on as a nation from the images of burning children, of starving infants, of the impact that bombs left behind, on the lives of many Palestinians, on their scarred bodies, in their hearts and minds, of the impact that a single bullet lodged in the child’s head or heart has over an entire family forever. We said long ago, we made a choice, to seek justice not vengeance, but we cannot be prevented from seeking either. We cannot continue to be denied our right to life, to liberty, to dignity. We cannot be denied recourse and reparation. No one has a rightful claim to supremacy, to exceptionalism, to domination, to oppression, no one.
3:48

Once the slaughter is over, and it has to be over, there is an expectation that Palestinians should move on regardless of the lives lost, of the limbs lost, of the loved ones lost. There is an expectation that parents will walk the earth with the shadow of their killed children and do nothing about it. The children who are orphaned will hold onto the memory of their parents but not to the anger over how they were killed. There is an expectation that a nation will be able to move on from the reality of parents carrying their children’s remains in plastic bags, of families buried under the rubble or in the sand they found shelter in after everything else was destroyed. That we will be able to move on as a nation from the images of burning children, of starving infants, of the impact that bombs left behind, on the lives of many Palestinians, on their scarred bodies, in their hearts and minds, of the impact that a single bullet lodged in the child’s head or heart has over an entire family forever. We said long ago, we made a choice, to seek justice not vengeance, but we cannot be prevented from seeking either. We cannot continue to be denied our right to life, to liberty, to dignity. We cannot be denied recourse and reparation. No one has a rightful claim to supremacy, to exceptionalism, to domination, to oppression, no one.

Ambassador Majed Bamya 🇵🇸

128,320 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Eagles coach Coach Rasool on Maxx Crosby and Brock Bowers : "It would be hard to tell the difference between them in practice and in a game. It looks the same. It always looked like the fourth quarter. Or the first snap of the game. Or the game-winning play. Max wanted to win at everything he did. He could be playing pool, a video game, cards and you'd have thought it was to break a record in the NFL. You'd have thought it was to go to the Super Bowl."
1:19

Eagles coach Coach Rasool on Maxx Crosby and Brock Bowers : "It would be hard to tell the difference between them in practice and in a game. It looks the same. It always looked like the fourth quarter. Or the first snap of the game. Or the game-winning play. Max wanted to win at everything he did. He could be playing pool, a video game, cards and you'd have thought it was to break a record in the NFL. You'd have thought it was to go to the Super Bowl."

Nik Atanackovic

30,530 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

NEW: 60 Minutes does a special on 'Chessboxing,' where chessboxers go back and forth between boxing and chess until there's a checkmate or knockout. The sport is popular in Russia but is starting to gain popularity in the United States. "Most people, on the surface, when they hear about chess boxing, they think that the battleground is the chess board or the boxing ring. And it is. You have to be good at both," said USA coach Matt Thomas. "But the real battlefield is the minute in between the rounds." Professional chess player from Michigan, James Canty III, recently won the super heavyweight final to become the new super heavyweight chess boxing champion of the world. Wild.
3:15

NEW: 60 Minutes does a special on 'Chessboxing,' where chessboxers go back and forth between boxing and chess until there's a checkmate or knockout. The sport is popular in Russia but is starting to gain popularity in the United States. "Most people, on the surface, when they hear about chess boxing, they think that the battleground is the chess board or the boxing ring. And it is. You have to be good at both," said USA coach Matt Thomas. "But the real battlefield is the minute in between the rounds." Professional chess player from Michigan, James Canty III, recently won the super heavyweight final to become the new super heavyweight chess boxing champion of the world. Wild.

Collin Rugg

159,936 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

An armed civilian in Tulsa shot a robber in the head… And the robber still ran across the street before collapsing. Read that again. This is why “one shot, one stop” is not a plan. This man was approached outside a convenience store by two robbers — one with a knife, one with a gun. Two on one. At night. At a gas station. That is one of the worst places to get caught slipping. But he was armed, he was aware enough to respond, and he fought back. That’s the win. But the lesson is bigger than one robbery. A headshot does not always mean instant lights out. A handgun does not hit like the movies. And when your life is on the line, betting everything on one perfect shot can get you killed. Train for reality. Not internet comments. Not movie logic. Not “just aim for the head” nonsense. Because the threat may keep moving. There may be a second attacker. And the fight may not be over when the first round goes off. So be honest: Do you train for multiple attackers and follow-up shots — or are most people still living in the “one shot ends everything” fantasy? Drop your answer below, and send this to the friend who thinks handguns work like Hollywood.
1:51

An armed civilian in Tulsa shot a robber in the head… And the robber still ran across the street before collapsing. Read that again. This is why “one shot, one stop” is not a plan. This man was approached outside a convenience store by two robbers — one with a knife, one with a gun. Two on one. At night. At a gas station. That is one of the worst places to get caught slipping. But he was armed, he was aware enough to respond, and he fought back. That’s the win. But the lesson is bigger than one robbery. A headshot does not always mean instant lights out. A handgun does not hit like the movies. And when your life is on the line, betting everything on one perfect shot can get you killed. Train for reality. Not internet comments. Not movie logic. Not “just aim for the head” nonsense. Because the threat may keep moving. There may be a second attacker. And the fight may not be over when the first round goes off. So be honest: Do you train for multiple attackers and follow-up shots — or are most people still living in the “one shot ends everything” fantasy? Drop your answer below, and send this to the friend who thinks handguns work like Hollywood.

Colion Noir

42,519 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

There was a parent who lost a child to the needle. Not lost to death, which at least lets you grieve and one day stop. Lost to the street. To the years of disappearing, the phone that stops being answered, the front door left unlocked every single night for a decade on the chance the child might finally come through it. And the parent never stopped. Did not move on. Did not decide the child was too far gone. Drove to the worst parts of town to scan the faces under the overpass. Searched for years, going gray with it, burying the hope a hundred times and digging it back up every morning, because a parent does not get to stop loving a child just because the child is lost. And then came the day it finally happened. The child, hollowed out, certain they were beyond all loving, looked up, and there was the parent's face. And neither of them could speak. They just held on, and they wept, the kind of weeping that has years of grief and years of longing pouring out of it at once, the child sobbing the only word they could find, sorry, sorry, and the parent saying the only word that mattered, which was not "where have you been" and not "do you know what you did to me," but only, over and over into their hair, you're home, you're home, you're home. Now understand. That is not just a real story about a parent and a child. That is God, and that is humanity. No one is forgotten by the Father. He did not fold His arms and wait at home for you to crawl back and prove you were worth it. The moment you were lost, He came after you. And the cost He paid to reach the very bottom of your pit was not patience, and it was not effort. It was His Son, sent down below all of it, so there would be no depth where His face was not already waiting for you to find it. So hear this, wherever it finds you. You were never forgotten, not for one second, not in the worst of it. The door has been unlocked every night since the day you left. He is still driving the worst parts of town. He is still scanning the faces under the overpass. He is still weeping over the ones who are certain they have fallen too far to ever come back. And the moment you turn around, you will not hear "where have you been." You will only hear, said over and over into your hair, the one thing that has been true since before the foundation of the world: you're home, you're home, you're home. Stop running. Come home.
0:39

There was a parent who lost a child to the needle. Not lost to death, which at least lets you grieve and one day stop. Lost to the street. To the years of disappearing, the phone that stops being answered, the front door left unlocked every single night for a decade on the chance the child might finally come through it. And the parent never stopped. Did not move on. Did not decide the child was too far gone. Drove to the worst parts of town to scan the faces under the overpass. Searched for years, going gray with it, burying the hope a hundred times and digging it back up every morning, because a parent does not get to stop loving a child just because the child is lost. And then came the day it finally happened. The child, hollowed out, certain they were beyond all loving, looked up, and there was the parent's face. And neither of them could speak. They just held on, and they wept, the kind of weeping that has years of grief and years of longing pouring out of it at once, the child sobbing the only word they could find, sorry, sorry, and the parent saying the only word that mattered, which was not "where have you been" and not "do you know what you did to me," but only, over and over into their hair, you're home, you're home, you're home. Now understand. That is not just a real story about a parent and a child. That is God, and that is humanity. No one is forgotten by the Father. He did not fold His arms and wait at home for you to crawl back and prove you were worth it. The moment you were lost, He came after you. And the cost He paid to reach the very bottom of your pit was not patience, and it was not effort. It was His Son, sent down below all of it, so there would be no depth where His face was not already waiting for you to find it. So hear this, wherever it finds you. You were never forgotten, not for one second, not in the worst of it. The door has been unlocked every night since the day you left. He is still driving the worst parts of town. He is still scanning the faces under the overpass. He is still weeping over the ones who are certain they have fallen too far to ever come back. And the moment you turn around, you will not hear "where have you been." You will only hear, said over and over into your hair, the one thing that has been true since before the foundation of the world: you're home, you're home, you're home. Stop running. Come home.

Kirk Rollins

21,168 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Danuel House Jr believes people move the goalpost in the Harden/Wade debate by saying James Harden changed the game: “Flash was this hard. You don’t got to change the game, I’m still going to get mine…. James has a nice Euro Step, step back, step back, shot. But this young man came through the middle of the lane, took it coast to coast and dunked on Varejao ass and then stepped over him and won a chip. He was a man amongst boys.” (Via Out The Mud Podcast)
3:21

Danuel House Jr believes people move the goalpost in the Harden/Wade debate by saying James Harden changed the game: “Flash was this hard. You don’t got to change the game, I’m still going to get mine…. James has a nice Euro Step, step back, step back, shot. But this young man came through the middle of the lane, took it coast to coast and dunked on Varejao ass and then stepped over him and won a chip. He was a man amongst boys.” (Via Out The Mud Podcast)

Heat Central

194,720 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

"This is the most not over a series could possibly be that was 2-0 after the home team lost twice" - Brandon Walker thinks the Spurs have a lot of life left in them against the Knicks
1:51

"This is the most not over a series could possibly be that was 2-0 after the home team lost twice" - Brandon Walker thinks the Spurs have a lot of life left in them against the Knicks

Mostly Sports With Mark Titus & Brandon Walker

89,735 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Chris Sharma spent weeks falling on the same move before Realization became the route that changed sport climbing forever. In 2001 at Céüse, France, Sharma was trying to finish a line that would become the world’s first confirmed 9a+ climb. The hardest part was not simply pulling harder. It was learning a sequence where every small mistake in body position took away the chance to move on. Realization’s crux was a lesson in precision. The holds were small, the movement was powerful and the margin was tiny. Sharma had the strength to do the individual moves, but linking them required a different skill: making every foothold, hip turn and reach happen in the same rhythm. The project forced him into unfamiliar territory. Before this climb, Sharma was famous for natural talent and flowing movement. Realization demanded patience, repetition and accepting failure as part of the process. The breakthrough came when the moves stopped feeling like separate battles. The route was no longer a collection of impossible holds. It became one sequence that his body understood. That is what makes the footage still fascinating. The final send looks like a display of power, but the real achievement happened in all the attempts before it. The falls were where the climb was solved. Realization was eventually climbed by Sharma in July 2001 and pushed the idea of what was possible on rock. The route became a symbol of a shift in climbing: elite performance was no longer only about having the strongest fingers or biggest pull. It was about finding the exact movement that made the rock work. More than two decades later, the lesson remains visible in every project session: sometimes the hardest move is not the one that requires more strength. It is the one that requires you to understand the problem better.
0:52

Chris Sharma spent weeks falling on the same move before Realization became the route that changed sport climbing forever. In 2001 at Céüse, France, Sharma was trying to finish a line that would become the world’s first confirmed 9a+ climb. The hardest part was not simply pulling harder. It was learning a sequence where every small mistake in body position took away the chance to move on. Realization’s crux was a lesson in precision. The holds were small, the movement was powerful and the margin was tiny. Sharma had the strength to do the individual moves, but linking them required a different skill: making every foothold, hip turn and reach happen in the same rhythm. The project forced him into unfamiliar territory. Before this climb, Sharma was famous for natural talent and flowing movement. Realization demanded patience, repetition and accepting failure as part of the process. The breakthrough came when the moves stopped feeling like separate battles. The route was no longer a collection of impossible holds. It became one sequence that his body understood. That is what makes the footage still fascinating. The final send looks like a display of power, but the real achievement happened in all the attempts before it. The falls were where the climb was solved. Realization was eventually climbed by Sharma in July 2001 and pushed the idea of what was possible on rock. The route became a symbol of a shift in climbing: elite performance was no longer only about having the strongest fingers or biggest pull. It was about finding the exact movement that made the rock work. More than two decades later, the lesson remains visible in every project session: sometimes the hardest move is not the one that requires more strength. It is the one that requires you to understand the problem better.

The Boulderer

35,293 görüntüleme • 23 gün önce

Egypt's President Sisi at the opening of Octagon state HQ in new Egyptian capital: There was a day when the Constitutional Court was besieged. And another day, the Council of Ministers was besieged. And on another day, they threatened the Ministry of Defense. And on another day, they besieged the Media Production City. It was imperative for the State to move out of the capital, and for this situation not to happen again. I am speaking with utmost frankness here. The State must move out of the capital so that this scenario is never repeated. The evil-doers and the terrorists will not stop. And God helps us, but we must also take the necessary precautions. Therefore, the State could no longer remain there. The parliament will not be there, the cabinet will not be there, and the Ministry of Defense will not be there, as it used to be. No, that is over. No one can ever do that in Egypt again.
1:36

Egypt's President Sisi at the opening of Octagon state HQ in new Egyptian capital: There was a day when the Constitutional Court was besieged. And another day, the Council of Ministers was besieged. And on another day, they threatened the Ministry of Defense. And on another day, they besieged the Media Production City. It was imperative for the State to move out of the capital, and for this situation not to happen again. I am speaking with utmost frankness here. The State must move out of the capital so that this scenario is never repeated. The evil-doers and the terrorists will not stop. And God helps us, but we must also take the necessary precautions. Therefore, the State could no longer remain there. The parliament will not be there, the cabinet will not be there, and the Ministry of Defense will not be there, as it used to be. No, that is over. No one can ever do that in Egypt again.

Clash Report

285,219 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

A woman sits between two men. One is old and wealthy, and he is offering her a fortune. The other is young with nothing to give but himself. And Bouguereau painted her in the exact moment before she chooses... The painting is called Entre la richesse et l'amour, "Between Wealth and Love," made in 1869 by the French master William-Adolphe Bouguereau. At its center sits a young woman in a soft pink dress, her expression caught somewhere between thought and sorrow. On one side of her leans an old man, richly dressed, holding out an ornate casket, a small chest of treasure. He is wealth. He is offering comfort, security, a life without want, in exchange for her hand. On her other side is a young man in simpler clothes, earnest, leaning toward her, his hand pressed over his heart. That gesture is all he offers. He holds out no gold and no gift, only himself, the sincerity of his feeling, and the promise of a life that may be poor but will be warm. He is love. Bouguereau does not tell us what she decides. That is the genius of the painting: he freezes her in the one instant every human being recognizes, the moment when two futures stand on either side of you, and you understand that to choose one is to lose the other forever. Everyone, sooner or later, sits in that chair. Everyone is asked, in one form or another, to choose between the safe life and the true one. And the painting does not pretend the choice is easy. It never tells us what she should do. It only asks us to look, and to notice what we find ourselves wishing for... I started my newsletter because the past is full of masterpieces like this one, and fewer and fewer people are helping us truly see them anymore. Every week I try to. If that is something you'd like to be part of, you can join through the link in my bio, and if you'd like to support my work, a paid subscription is what makes it possible. Thanks for reading.
0:31

A woman sits between two men. One is old and wealthy, and he is offering her a fortune. The other is young with nothing to give but himself. And Bouguereau painted her in the exact moment before she chooses... The painting is called Entre la richesse et l'amour, "Between Wealth and Love," made in 1869 by the French master William-Adolphe Bouguereau. At its center sits a young woman in a soft pink dress, her expression caught somewhere between thought and sorrow. On one side of her leans an old man, richly dressed, holding out an ornate casket, a small chest of treasure. He is wealth. He is offering comfort, security, a life without want, in exchange for her hand. On her other side is a young man in simpler clothes, earnest, leaning toward her, his hand pressed over his heart. That gesture is all he offers. He holds out no gold and no gift, only himself, the sincerity of his feeling, and the promise of a life that may be poor but will be warm. He is love. Bouguereau does not tell us what she decides. That is the genius of the painting: he freezes her in the one instant every human being recognizes, the moment when two futures stand on either side of you, and you understand that to choose one is to lose the other forever. Everyone, sooner or later, sits in that chair. Everyone is asked, in one form or another, to choose between the safe life and the true one. And the painting does not pretend the choice is easy. It never tells us what she should do. It only asks us to look, and to notice what we find ourselves wishing for... I started my newsletter because the past is full of masterpieces like this one, and fewer and fewer people are helping us truly see them anymore. Every week I try to. If that is something you'd like to be part of, you can join through the link in my bio, and if you'd like to support my work, a paid subscription is what makes it possible. Thanks for reading.

James Lucas

110,698 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce