Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

The Rive Vehicle HMI Challenge submissions are already wild. 📆 Deadline extended to April 1 🚀 Get in on Contra Yi Lai built a retro neon dashboard. Ian Sterling recreated the James Bond Lotus Esprit submarine car. Kavindu W made a circular media player. Paweł Andrzejewski designed a full...

rive_app's profile picture

Rive

84,192 subscribers

12,307 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

🔥 The Official 90-Day Transformation Challenge is LIVE! Link in bio to join! 👇🏽 Full Details Below: What EVERY participant gets: 👉🏽 Custom workout program designed around your lifestyle 👉🏽 Personalized nutrition plan built to maximize your results 👉🏽Weekly coaching calls with me for 3 months hands-on guidance every step 👉🏽 Your own 90-day transformation to finally see lasting change What the WINNER gets: 👉🏽 Full refund of the challenge cost turning your journey into a free transformation 👉🏽 6 months of FREE 1:1 coaching with me after the challenge 👉🏽An all-expenses paid trip to Los Angeles to train with me in person This is the biggest transformation + Value opportunity I’ve ever launched. Everyone walks away with powerful results, but ONE person will take it all the way! 💪🏽❤️ ⏳ Deadline: Labor Day at MIDNIGHT 🚀 Spots are officially open now. Link in bio to secure your spot!!
1:13

🔥 The Official 90-Day Transformation Challenge is LIVE! Link in bio to join! 👇🏽 Full Details Below: What EVERY participant gets: 👉🏽 Custom workout program designed around your lifestyle 👉🏽 Personalized nutrition plan built to maximize your results 👉🏽Weekly coaching calls with me for 3 months hands-on guidance every step 👉🏽 Your own 90-day transformation to finally see lasting change What the WINNER gets: 👉🏽 Full refund of the challenge cost turning your journey into a free transformation 👉🏽 6 months of FREE 1:1 coaching with me after the challenge 👉🏽An all-expenses paid trip to Los Angeles to train with me in person This is the biggest transformation + Value opportunity I’ve ever launched. Everyone walks away with powerful results, but ONE person will take it all the way! 💪🏽❤️ ⏳ Deadline: Labor Day at MIDNIGHT 🚀 Spots are officially open now. Link in bio to secure your spot!!

Trevor Bell

13,788 просмотров • 1 год назад

This is big. NVIDIA and Apple just unlocked the next level for Vision Pro with CloudXR. Here’s what you need to know: It streams from a PC or the cloud directly to your Vision Pro. No cables. Up to 4K at 120fps. The technology is called dynamic foveated streaming. Your eyes only see in full resolution at the center of your gaze. CloudXR tracks exactly where you’re looking and delivers maximum resolution there. Everything in your periphery gets optimized. The stream stays efficient without you ever noticing a difference. Why does this matter? Vision Pro is already the most advanced spatial computer ever made. But standalone processing has a ceiling. There are workflows that need more compute than any headset can carry. CloudXR removes that ceiling by connecting Vision Pro to the full power of NVIDIA RTX in real time. This is not a workaround. It is a native visionOS integration. Also worth knowing. Gaze data never leaves your device. Not to the app. Not to the server. Developers get the full performance benefit of foveation without ever touching your raw eye tracking data. Privacy built into the architecture. Three industries are already on this: Kia, Rivian, and Volvo are running 1:1 scale design reviews with photorealistic accuracy. Full size vehicle models evaluated in spatial computing before a physical prototype exists. That is a fundamental shift in how design works. Foxconn is walking factory floors digitally, optimizing facilities before construction begins. Switch is managing data center infrastructure through a full digital twin. Companies using this approach are reporting up to 30% improvement in development processes. And sim enthusiasts finally get to cut the cord. iRacing and X-Plane 12 are the first titles. Full GeForce RTX power, streamed wirelessly to Vision Pro, inside your physical space. For developers: one Xcode template, one codebase, deployed across Vision Pro, iPhone, and iPad. And multiple headsets can share the same streamed environment at once. Some fully immersed, others on a tablet. That collaborative layer is what enterprise has been asking for. Coming this spring with visionOS 26.4. It’s wild to think about what this unlocks. The future of spatial computing is incredibly bright. Live from GTC. More coming soon.
0:21

This is big. NVIDIA and Apple just unlocked the next level for Vision Pro with CloudXR. Here’s what you need to know: It streams from a PC or the cloud directly to your Vision Pro. No cables. Up to 4K at 120fps. The technology is called dynamic foveated streaming. Your eyes only see in full resolution at the center of your gaze. CloudXR tracks exactly where you’re looking and delivers maximum resolution there. Everything in your periphery gets optimized. The stream stays efficient without you ever noticing a difference. Why does this matter? Vision Pro is already the most advanced spatial computer ever made. But standalone processing has a ceiling. There are workflows that need more compute than any headset can carry. CloudXR removes that ceiling by connecting Vision Pro to the full power of NVIDIA RTX in real time. This is not a workaround. It is a native visionOS integration. Also worth knowing. Gaze data never leaves your device. Not to the app. Not to the server. Developers get the full performance benefit of foveation without ever touching your raw eye tracking data. Privacy built into the architecture. Three industries are already on this: Kia, Rivian, and Volvo are running 1:1 scale design reviews with photorealistic accuracy. Full size vehicle models evaluated in spatial computing before a physical prototype exists. That is a fundamental shift in how design works. Foxconn is walking factory floors digitally, optimizing facilities before construction begins. Switch is managing data center infrastructure through a full digital twin. Companies using this approach are reporting up to 30% improvement in development processes. And sim enthusiasts finally get to cut the cord. iRacing and X-Plane 12 are the first titles. Full GeForce RTX power, streamed wirelessly to Vision Pro, inside your physical space. For developers: one Xcode template, one codebase, deployed across Vision Pro, iPhone, and iPad. And multiple headsets can share the same streamed environment at once. Some fully immersed, others on a tablet. That collaborative layer is what enterprise has been asking for. Coming this spring with visionOS 26.4. It’s wild to think about what this unlocks. The future of spatial computing is incredibly bright. Live from GTC. More coming soon.

Justin Ryan

43,685 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Xiaomi SU7 Ultra, with 1548 horsepower, as a true production vehicle, recorded a 7:04.957 Nürburgring lap time in June 2025, breaking the previous records held by Rimac Nevera (7:05.298) and Porsche Taycan Turbo GT (7:07.55). In a run against our BMW i4 M50, the SU7 made it feel as if we were driving a broken B58 in an M2. But stepping back before the final driving impression — our inspection of the vehicle brutally impressed us. Unlike mainstream media that focuses on panel gaps, leather on the gear selector, and other superficial “cup holder review” topics, we went a bit deeper under the surface. The first – and essentially the only serious downside – is that the car has SGW (Secure Gateway), meaning the OBD diagnostic port is locked. By searching for the powertrain CAN bus somewhere along the wiring harness, we were able to manually access the PT network, bypass the SGW, sniff the network and capture packets. The battery system is Qilin 2, with a CATL-derived BMS stack with only minor modifications (similar approach as seen in Xpeng and NIO). On the powertrain side, the CAN network looks very similar to a UAES/Bosch architecture (0x1A0–0x1AF). The official diagnostic tool costs around €10,000, but we are already developing our own tool so we can support this rocket within our service ecosystem. The BMS is an 800V system with 214 NMC prismatic cells in series, forming a 93.7 kWh battery pack tailored for high performance. The car offers up to 630 km (391 miles) CLTC range. It supports 800V fast charging, capable of 10–80% in just 11 minutes (5.2C rate). The pack supports 16C discharge, while the battery mass is 638 kg. The vehicle comes fully in track-focused configuration: massive ceramic brake discs, pads, calipers, wheels, and tires. Unlike the Model S Plaid, this car can take repeated track abuse for 6–7 hours continuously. The rear motor is a dual-unit setup with torque vectoring, which works brutally well but requires proper understanding of the system and tuning in Track Mode. The operating system is HyperOS, very similar to Tesla’s system — perhaps even more detailed in some aspects. Interior quality is excellent, driving characteristics are outstanding, and the overall ride comfort is surprisingly well balanced. The seats are actually more comfortable than those in the BMW i4. Now for the most interesting part. When disassembling interior plastics and cosmetic components, we discovered a surprisingly strong similarity to Tesla Model 3 / Model S next-generation chassis design. The front shock tower, shotgun rails, front HVAC carrier, even the rear seat clips — underneath, the battery penthouse layout, wiring routing, reinforcements, and cable positioning look extremely familiar. The vehicle weighs 2360 kg, while the full-carbon prototype series reportedly weighs around 1900 kg. impression? The overall quality of the vehicle is impressive for a company building its first electric car, especially considering it already broke every major performance record. A similar precedent happened once before — when Tesla introduced the Model S. The SU7 Ultra “democratizes” 1550 horsepower for under €100,000 — performance that is now literally accessible to everyone. Some street racing veterans spend over €250,000 on forged internals, turbo systems, and tuning just to reach similar numbers. Conclusion? This car doesn’t just challenge the German automotive industry — in this segment, it completely dominates it and practically euthanizes it. Every major component on this vehicle has been internally developed and manufactured in China, and pushed very close to perfection. The only thing we still don’t know is how repairable and serviceable the vehicle will be long-term — and only mileage and time will answer that question. Would we have one? Yes! We have already ordered one and started building the import and homologation network. Among our previous favorites — Tesla and BMW — this one is now clearly #1.
2:39

Xiaomi SU7 Ultra, with 1548 horsepower, as a true production vehicle, recorded a 7:04.957 Nürburgring lap time in June 2025, breaking the previous records held by Rimac Nevera (7:05.298) and Porsche Taycan Turbo GT (7:07.55). In a run against our BMW i4 M50, the SU7 made it feel as if we were driving a broken B58 in an M2. But stepping back before the final driving impression — our inspection of the vehicle brutally impressed us. Unlike mainstream media that focuses on panel gaps, leather on the gear selector, and other superficial “cup holder review” topics, we went a bit deeper under the surface. The first – and essentially the only serious downside – is that the car has SGW (Secure Gateway), meaning the OBD diagnostic port is locked. By searching for the powertrain CAN bus somewhere along the wiring harness, we were able to manually access the PT network, bypass the SGW, sniff the network and capture packets. The battery system is Qilin 2, with a CATL-derived BMS stack with only minor modifications (similar approach as seen in Xpeng and NIO). On the powertrain side, the CAN network looks very similar to a UAES/Bosch architecture (0x1A0–0x1AF). The official diagnostic tool costs around €10,000, but we are already developing our own tool so we can support this rocket within our service ecosystem. The BMS is an 800V system with 214 NMC prismatic cells in series, forming a 93.7 kWh battery pack tailored for high performance. The car offers up to 630 km (391 miles) CLTC range. It supports 800V fast charging, capable of 10–80% in just 11 minutes (5.2C rate). The pack supports 16C discharge, while the battery mass is 638 kg. The vehicle comes fully in track-focused configuration: massive ceramic brake discs, pads, calipers, wheels, and tires. Unlike the Model S Plaid, this car can take repeated track abuse for 6–7 hours continuously. The rear motor is a dual-unit setup with torque vectoring, which works brutally well but requires proper understanding of the system and tuning in Track Mode. The operating system is HyperOS, very similar to Tesla’s system — perhaps even more detailed in some aspects. Interior quality is excellent, driving characteristics are outstanding, and the overall ride comfort is surprisingly well balanced. The seats are actually more comfortable than those in the BMW i4. Now for the most interesting part. When disassembling interior plastics and cosmetic components, we discovered a surprisingly strong similarity to Tesla Model 3 / Model S next-generation chassis design. The front shock tower, shotgun rails, front HVAC carrier, even the rear seat clips — underneath, the battery penthouse layout, wiring routing, reinforcements, and cable positioning look extremely familiar. The vehicle weighs 2360 kg, while the full-carbon prototype series reportedly weighs around 1900 kg. impression? The overall quality of the vehicle is impressive for a company building its first electric car, especially considering it already broke every major performance record. A similar precedent happened once before — when Tesla introduced the Model S. The SU7 Ultra “democratizes” 1550 horsepower for under €100,000 — performance that is now literally accessible to everyone. Some street racing veterans spend over €250,000 on forged internals, turbo systems, and tuning just to reach similar numbers. Conclusion? This car doesn’t just challenge the German automotive industry — in this segment, it completely dominates it and practically euthanizes it. Every major component on this vehicle has been internally developed and manufactured in China, and pushed very close to perfection. The only thing we still don’t know is how repairable and serviceable the vehicle will be long-term — and only mileage and time will answer that question. Would we have one? Yes! We have already ordered one and started building the import and homologation network. Among our previous favorites — Tesla and BMW — this one is now clearly #1.

EV Clinic

22,172 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

When Elon Musk and Tesla let me, and millions of other owners, add our own cars to the Tesla Robotaxi network via a software update, it’s going to be the greatest wealth CREATION in human history. I get it. For the first time ever, a Tesla will become an $ income producing asset bc your Tesla will be able to drive itself while you’re sleeping, working, or even on vacation. This is NOT a sci-fi idea anymore. Elon has been clear for years. The hardware is already in the cars and the thing that will unlock this is going to be software. Here’s a simple version of how it’s going to work imo: 1/ A software update turns your Tesla into a robotaxi 2/ You opt in with one tap in the Tesla app 3/ Your car gives rides when you’re not using it 4/ Tesla takes a cut, you keep the rest 5/ You can pull your car out anytime, you have full control Think Airbnb, but for cars. Now on the $ generation side, this is where it can get a bit wild. Elon has said a high use robotaxi could generate ~$30,000 per year per car, and even more in busy cities. That means, 1/ A car payment pays for itself 2/ A car can become your own business 3/ And for some people, this can allow them to become financially free Elon even said robotaxi earnings should far exceed monthly car payments... this will completely flip how we think about owning a vehicle. A lot of long time Tesla investors call this the “greatest wealth transfer in history”… Elon corrected that and said something important: “Not transfer of wealth, CREATION of wealth. The pie gets much bigger.” And I believe he’s right. Autonomy makes transportation cheaper, safer, and available 24/7. This saves time, reduces accidents, lowers costs for everyone, and unlocks $ trillions of dollars in new economic value that NEVER existed before. Elon has also said: “The day FSD (w/ this Robotaxi feature) goes to wide release will be one of the biggest asset value increases in history.” That will be the day when cars are viewed as an appreciating asset instead of a depreciating asset! The scale is hard to wrap my head around tbh bc: • There are already millions of Teslas on the road • Even a small % opt-in rate creates massive fleets overnight, Waymo is screwed imo with their peanut sized 2,500 fleet • No new factories are needed • No new drivers needed Just pure AI software. Bro… this moment is going to be REALLY big. This could be the first time in human history where regular people like you and me get access to automation and making $ at scale, instead of only the big players and corporations. And when this switch flips, the way we view a car, specifically a Tesla will never look the same again. (FYI, once Elon and Tesla give me the green light, I plan on buying ~25 Teslas outright and put them into the Robotaxi network to show the world exactly what I mean)
0:25

When Elon Musk and Tesla let me, and millions of other owners, add our own cars to the Tesla Robotaxi network via a software update, it’s going to be the greatest wealth CREATION in human history. I get it. For the first time ever, a Tesla will become an $ income producing asset bc your Tesla will be able to drive itself while you’re sleeping, working, or even on vacation. This is NOT a sci-fi idea anymore. Elon has been clear for years. The hardware is already in the cars and the thing that will unlock this is going to be software. Here’s a simple version of how it’s going to work imo: 1/ A software update turns your Tesla into a robotaxi 2/ You opt in with one tap in the Tesla app 3/ Your car gives rides when you’re not using it 4/ Tesla takes a cut, you keep the rest 5/ You can pull your car out anytime, you have full control Think Airbnb, but for cars. Now on the $ generation side, this is where it can get a bit wild. Elon has said a high use robotaxi could generate ~$30,000 per year per car, and even more in busy cities. That means, 1/ A car payment pays for itself 2/ A car can become your own business 3/ And for some people, this can allow them to become financially free Elon even said robotaxi earnings should far exceed monthly car payments... this will completely flip how we think about owning a vehicle. A lot of long time Tesla investors call this the “greatest wealth transfer in history”… Elon corrected that and said something important: “Not transfer of wealth, CREATION of wealth. The pie gets much bigger.” And I believe he’s right. Autonomy makes transportation cheaper, safer, and available 24/7. This saves time, reduces accidents, lowers costs for everyone, and unlocks $ trillions of dollars in new economic value that NEVER existed before. Elon has also said: “The day FSD (w/ this Robotaxi feature) goes to wide release will be one of the biggest asset value increases in history.” That will be the day when cars are viewed as an appreciating asset instead of a depreciating asset! The scale is hard to wrap my head around tbh bc: • There are already millions of Teslas on the road • Even a small % opt-in rate creates massive fleets overnight, Waymo is screwed imo with their peanut sized 2,500 fleet • No new factories are needed • No new drivers needed Just pure AI software. Bro… this moment is going to be REALLY big. This could be the first time in human history where regular people like you and me get access to automation and making $ at scale, instead of only the big players and corporations. And when this switch flips, the way we view a car, specifically a Tesla will never look the same again. (FYI, once Elon and Tesla give me the green light, I plan on buying ~25 Teslas outright and put them into the Robotaxi network to show the world exactly what I mean)

Teslaconomics

58,572 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

At 12:20am on July 4th in the Idaho desert, I watched dozens of engineers hold their breath. Then the neutron counters confirmed it: self-sustaining chain reaction. The Aalo Atomics reactor was critical! Everyone erupted. Cheers, hugs, and a few tears. Three years ago this company was an idea on a whiteboard. We backed them then. This weekend they took a full-scale core critical – the first new sodium-cooled reactor in America in over four decades. Built in under 8 months from groundbreaking. The federal deadline for criticality was July 4th. They made it 20 minutes in. Criticality means the chain reaction is self-sustaining. Every fission triggers exactly one more, no external neutron source needed. It happens at near-zero power. It proves that the core geometry, the fuel, and the control systems all behave exactly as modeled. What makes this one different: the core Aalo took critical is already sized for 30 MW thermal / 10 MW electric once coolant and power conversion are added. That's roughly an order of magnitude larger than the other startup reactors that recently went critical. And this design IS the product: five reactors around one turbine, a 50 MW factory-built pod purpose-designed for AI data centers. No major redesign needed. From here: power ascension to 30 MW thermal, endurance runs, turbine sync, then powering a co-located data center in 2027. In 1951, this same desert made the first electricity from atomic energy. Enough for four lightbulbs. 74 years later, the lightbulbs are GPUs. Second atomic age. Same desert. So grateful I got to see it!
0:44

At 12:20am on July 4th in the Idaho desert, I watched dozens of engineers hold their breath. Then the neutron counters confirmed it: self-sustaining chain reaction. The Aalo Atomics reactor was critical! Everyone erupted. Cheers, hugs, and a few tears. Three years ago this company was an idea on a whiteboard. We backed them then. This weekend they took a full-scale core critical – the first new sodium-cooled reactor in America in over four decades. Built in under 8 months from groundbreaking. The federal deadline for criticality was July 4th. They made it 20 minutes in. Criticality means the chain reaction is self-sustaining. Every fission triggers exactly one more, no external neutron source needed. It happens at near-zero power. It proves that the core geometry, the fuel, and the control systems all behave exactly as modeled. What makes this one different: the core Aalo took critical is already sized for 30 MW thermal / 10 MW electric once coolant and power conversion are added. That's roughly an order of magnitude larger than the other startup reactors that recently went critical. And this design IS the product: five reactors around one turbine, a 50 MW factory-built pod purpose-designed for AI data centers. No major redesign needed. From here: power ascension to 30 MW thermal, endurance runs, turbine sync, then powering a co-located data center in 2027. In 1951, this same desert made the first electricity from atomic energy. Enough for four lightbulbs. 74 years later, the lightbulbs are GPUs. Second atomic age. Same desert. So grateful I got to see it!

Seth Bannon

41,771 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

The Cybercab is aiming to produce 2 million units per year. Let this sink in. Today, Tesla produces about ~1.7 million vehicles per year total, across its entire lineup. And now Tesla is preparing to outproduce that with one single vehicle, a fully autonomous one. This is Elon and Tesla going ALL-IN on autonomy. Production is scheduled to start April 2026 at Giga Texas, with volume ramping throughout the year. And as of early 2026, Cybercab prototypes are already being tested around the U.S. The Tesla Cybercab is built from the ground up for unsupervised autonomy. There is no steering wheel and no pedals, just cameras, AI, and Tesla’s custom inference computers. No lidar and radar like other companies, just pure vision and software. Elon put it best on the Q3 2024 earnings call: “It’s not just a revolutionary vehicle design, but a revolution in vehicle manufacturing that is also coming with the Cybercab.” That quote matters a lot bc that means the entire way a vehicle is manufactured is changing with the Cybercab. Tesla is designing what Elon calls “the machine that builds the machine.” The Cybercab uses Tesla’s unboxed manufacturing process, where major sections are built in parallel instead of one long assembly line. There are fewer parts, less steps & cost, and faster scale. That’s how you make 2 million Cybercabs per year possible. FYI, this is not going to be easy though. Elon has been brutally honest about production for many years: • “Prototypes are easy, production is hard.” • “The extreme difficulty of scaling production of new technology is poorly understood. It’s 1000% to 10,000% harder than making a few prototypes.” • “For cars, it’s maybe 100 times harder to design the manufacturing system than the car itself.” He reinforced this again in January 2026 when talking about Cybercab and Optimus on 𝕏: “Initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of the production ramp is inversely proportional to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow - but eventually end up being insanely fast.” This is the key thing most people miss about Tesla manufacturing. Early output will be slow by design. Almost everything is new like the vehicle architecture, factory layout, AI hardware, and manufacturing flow. But once it works and clicks, it begins to scale hard. Tesla already proved they can do this. They survived Model 3 production hell. They turned Model Y into the BEST selling car in the world, of any kind. They ramped Cybertruck, which has over 30,000+ unique parts, to meaningful volume. Elon summed it up perfectly in 2024: “Compared to the insane pain of reaching high volume, positive margin production, prototypes are a piece of cake.” That’s why Tesla makes manufacturing look easy bc they already earned the scars from the last vehicle lineups. The Cybercab is aiming to be: 1/ Under $30,000 price 2/ ~$0.20 per mile operating cost 3/ 200+ mile range 4/ Up to 5x utilization vs personal cars 5/ Designed to run nearly nonstop 24/7 This is what you call manufacturing + AI + autonomy converging at scale. The competitors are still showing prototypes and demos, while Tesla is building new production lines, expanding factories, and actually building the product. I remember when Elon told me in the past that one of Tesla’s key advantage long term was going to be manufacturing technology. I get it now.
0:21

The Cybercab is aiming to produce 2 million units per year. Let this sink in. Today, Tesla produces about ~1.7 million vehicles per year total, across its entire lineup. And now Tesla is preparing to outproduce that with one single vehicle, a fully autonomous one. This is Elon and Tesla going ALL-IN on autonomy. Production is scheduled to start April 2026 at Giga Texas, with volume ramping throughout the year. And as of early 2026, Cybercab prototypes are already being tested around the U.S. The Tesla Cybercab is built from the ground up for unsupervised autonomy. There is no steering wheel and no pedals, just cameras, AI, and Tesla’s custom inference computers. No lidar and radar like other companies, just pure vision and software. Elon put it best on the Q3 2024 earnings call: “It’s not just a revolutionary vehicle design, but a revolution in vehicle manufacturing that is also coming with the Cybercab.” That quote matters a lot bc that means the entire way a vehicle is manufactured is changing with the Cybercab. Tesla is designing what Elon calls “the machine that builds the machine.” The Cybercab uses Tesla’s unboxed manufacturing process, where major sections are built in parallel instead of one long assembly line. There are fewer parts, less steps & cost, and faster scale. That’s how you make 2 million Cybercabs per year possible. FYI, this is not going to be easy though. Elon has been brutally honest about production for many years: • “Prototypes are easy, production is hard.” • “The extreme difficulty of scaling production of new technology is poorly understood. It’s 1000% to 10,000% harder than making a few prototypes.” • “For cars, it’s maybe 100 times harder to design the manufacturing system than the car itself.” He reinforced this again in January 2026 when talking about Cybercab and Optimus on 𝕏: “Initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of the production ramp is inversely proportional to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow - but eventually end up being insanely fast.” This is the key thing most people miss about Tesla manufacturing. Early output will be slow by design. Almost everything is new like the vehicle architecture, factory layout, AI hardware, and manufacturing flow. But once it works and clicks, it begins to scale hard. Tesla already proved they can do this. They survived Model 3 production hell. They turned Model Y into the BEST selling car in the world, of any kind. They ramped Cybertruck, which has over 30,000+ unique parts, to meaningful volume. Elon summed it up perfectly in 2024: “Compared to the insane pain of reaching high volume, positive margin production, prototypes are a piece of cake.” That’s why Tesla makes manufacturing look easy bc they already earned the scars from the last vehicle lineups. The Cybercab is aiming to be: 1/ Under $30,000 price 2/ ~$0.20 per mile operating cost 3/ 200+ mile range 4/ Up to 5x utilization vs personal cars 5/ Designed to run nearly nonstop 24/7 This is what you call manufacturing + AI + autonomy converging at scale. The competitors are still showing prototypes and demos, while Tesla is building new production lines, expanding factories, and actually building the product. I remember when Elon told me in the past that one of Tesla’s key advantage long term was going to be manufacturing technology. I get it now.

Teslaconomics

31,985 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Snapple Facts 1. Never recruited by Ohio State. 2. I was so confident in my ability as a player that I called OSU up and told them I was committing to their school without an offer. They didn’t say yes or no. Tressel laughed and was like … “I guess”. 3. The whole “graduate in January” from high school started from me trying to graduate my junior year. I had so much success my junior year that I said I didn’t want to return my senior year and that I wanted to go to college. I couldn’t graduate because I didn’t have all of my English credits. I took my senior English class in the summer of my junior year and that positioned me to leave after senior year of football. Once I knew I was good I was on a mission to get to college because Youngstown was so wild. 4. I was 4th on the depth chart up until 2 weeks before the season. I played a lot of special teams and scout team. Scout team was how I got better. I never knew that our defense would be #1 in the country that year. I had an entire spring/fall practicing against them. That’s what ultimately made me better. Scout team reps are gold to a wise man and trash to a player with an ego. Reps get you better… doesn’t matter if it’s scout team or with the ones. You need reps to gain experience and wisdom. 5. I talk passionately about player compensation because me not being able to afford a transmission for my car ultimately altered my collegiate experience. I helped generate 10’s of millions of dollars to a college in many ways but couldn’t pay $2k to get a car fixed to get back and forth to school. That sent me searching for alternatives. When you generate that much money you shouldn’t be in a position to have to search alternative ways…. That’s why I’m happy for NIL but we still have a long way to go with distribution of revenue in the collegiate space. 6. Football was and still is a means to an end for a lot of us players. Listen to the words I say in the beginning of the video. I don’t say “I love football”. I say “I love hard work and I happen to be good at football”. At the core of it I love progress and I have work ethic. Whatever vehicle is going to help me achieve my dreams I’m rolling with it.
3:45

Snapple Facts 1. Never recruited by Ohio State. 2. I was so confident in my ability as a player that I called OSU up and told them I was committing to their school without an offer. They didn’t say yes or no. Tressel laughed and was like … “I guess”. 3. The whole “graduate in January” from high school started from me trying to graduate my junior year. I had so much success my junior year that I said I didn’t want to return my senior year and that I wanted to go to college. I couldn’t graduate because I didn’t have all of my English credits. I took my senior English class in the summer of my junior year and that positioned me to leave after senior year of football. Once I knew I was good I was on a mission to get to college because Youngstown was so wild. 4. I was 4th on the depth chart up until 2 weeks before the season. I played a lot of special teams and scout team. Scout team was how I got better. I never knew that our defense would be #1 in the country that year. I had an entire spring/fall practicing against them. That’s what ultimately made me better. Scout team reps are gold to a wise man and trash to a player with an ego. Reps get you better… doesn’t matter if it’s scout team or with the ones. You need reps to gain experience and wisdom. 5. I talk passionately about player compensation because me not being able to afford a transmission for my car ultimately altered my collegiate experience. I helped generate 10’s of millions of dollars to a college in many ways but couldn’t pay $2k to get a car fixed to get back and forth to school. That sent me searching for alternatives. When you generate that much money you shouldn’t be in a position to have to search alternative ways…. That’s why I’m happy for NIL but we still have a long way to go with distribution of revenue in the collegiate space. 6. Football was and still is a means to an end for a lot of us players. Listen to the words I say in the beginning of the video. I don’t say “I love football”. I say “I love hard work and I happen to be good at football”. At the core of it I love progress and I have work ethic. Whatever vehicle is going to help me achieve my dreams I’m rolling with it.

Maurice Clarett

399,139 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Pony Up or Sell the Tigers, Chrissy Mike Illitch spent big to get the Tigers to the World Series in 2012, but his son has cut the team’s payroll by 27% since By Charlie LeDuff Charlie LeDuff Detroit — Chris Ilitch is a bum. The tightwad owner of the Detroit Tigers wouldn’t pay for a professional hitter or a competent pitcher at the trading deadline, and now the club is out of the playoffs. I hear some armchair analysts claiming Ilitch has, in fact, spent money to improve the club. But that’s just not true. The numbers: The last time the Tigers made it to the World Series was in 2012 when Ilitch’s father, Mike, was guiding the club and spending whatever it took to win a championship. Back then, the Tigers had the fifth-highest opening day payroll in major league baseball. Adjusted for inflation, that payroll was $190 million in today’s dollars. This year’s opening day payroll was $138 million, ranking 17th in the major leagues. That is a 27% cut over 13 years. Over that same time period—again adjusted for inflation—the average MLB payroll increased 47%. See where I’m going with this? Chrissy is a skinflint. Ilitch took full control of the club in 2017, following the death of his father, who was laid to rest in a million-dollar suburban mausoleum built with Sierra White granite imported from California. (Michigan has granite, why not buy locally?) Since Chrissy took the reins, the Tigers’ record is a combined 592-761, the sixth worst in baseball. See where I’m going with this? Chrissy is a penny pincher. And when his staff is given the greenlight to spend some money, the baseball decisions are bush league. This past offseason, the Tigers spent $15 million on a pitcher who never made the club. Another $20 million for a pitcher who finished this season with an 8-15 record. And an additional $7.5 million for a closer with a 4.43 ERA. Most galling of all are the welfare checks Ilitch sucks from Detroit, the poorest big city in America. The Ilitch family is fantastically wealthy. Little Caesars Pizza, Inc. is valued at $7 billion. The Motor City Casino pulls in more than $385 million a year. The Detroit Red Wings are valued at $2.5 billion. And the Tigers’ estimated value is $1.5 billion. The thing about the Tigers and Red Wings, however, is that their total worth includes the value of the stadiums where they play, both of which are paid for and owned by the public. Ilitch pays $1 a year to “lease” the publicly financed stadiums but keeps all the revenue from the beer, pizza, jersey and ticket sales. The bond payments for Little Caesars Arena are more than $20 million a year for the next 30 years. That’s enough to keep Skubal around. See where I’m going with this? Ilitch is a mooch. No professional sports owner siphons more out of his community than Chrissy Icehole. We deserve a winner in Detroit. A decent beer at a decent price. A hot dog that’s actually edible. And a stadium with a place to smoke a cigarette. But we’re not gonna get any of that with Ilitch. Sell the club, you bum.
0:58

Pony Up or Sell the Tigers, Chrissy Mike Illitch spent big to get the Tigers to the World Series in 2012, but his son has cut the team’s payroll by 27% since By Charlie LeDuff Charlie LeDuff Detroit — Chris Ilitch is a bum. The tightwad owner of the Detroit Tigers wouldn’t pay for a professional hitter or a competent pitcher at the trading deadline, and now the club is out of the playoffs. I hear some armchair analysts claiming Ilitch has, in fact, spent money to improve the club. But that’s just not true. The numbers: The last time the Tigers made it to the World Series was in 2012 when Ilitch’s father, Mike, was guiding the club and spending whatever it took to win a championship. Back then, the Tigers had the fifth-highest opening day payroll in major league baseball. Adjusted for inflation, that payroll was $190 million in today’s dollars. This year’s opening day payroll was $138 million, ranking 17th in the major leagues. That is a 27% cut over 13 years. Over that same time period—again adjusted for inflation—the average MLB payroll increased 47%. See where I’m going with this? Chrissy is a skinflint. Ilitch took full control of the club in 2017, following the death of his father, who was laid to rest in a million-dollar suburban mausoleum built with Sierra White granite imported from California. (Michigan has granite, why not buy locally?) Since Chrissy took the reins, the Tigers’ record is a combined 592-761, the sixth worst in baseball. See where I’m going with this? Chrissy is a penny pincher. And when his staff is given the greenlight to spend some money, the baseball decisions are bush league. This past offseason, the Tigers spent $15 million on a pitcher who never made the club. Another $20 million for a pitcher who finished this season with an 8-15 record. And an additional $7.5 million for a closer with a 4.43 ERA. Most galling of all are the welfare checks Ilitch sucks from Detroit, the poorest big city in America. The Ilitch family is fantastically wealthy. Little Caesars Pizza, Inc. is valued at $7 billion. The Motor City Casino pulls in more than $385 million a year. The Detroit Red Wings are valued at $2.5 billion. And the Tigers’ estimated value is $1.5 billion. The thing about the Tigers and Red Wings, however, is that their total worth includes the value of the stadiums where they play, both of which are paid for and owned by the public. Ilitch pays $1 a year to “lease” the publicly financed stadiums but keeps all the revenue from the beer, pizza, jersey and ticket sales. The bond payments for Little Caesars Arena are more than $20 million a year for the next 30 years. That’s enough to keep Skubal around. See where I’m going with this? Ilitch is a mooch. No professional sports owner siphons more out of his community than Chrissy Icehole. We deserve a winner in Detroit. A decent beer at a decent price. A hot dog that’s actually edible. And a stadium with a place to smoke a cigarette. But we’re not gonna get any of that with Ilitch. Sell the club, you bum.

Michigan Enjoyer

39,631 просмотров • 1 год назад

Doubling down on my $RIVN Investment! Here are all the reasons why: • Founder RJ (RJ Scaringe), an MIT grad, is brilliant, hands-on, and laser-focused on Rivian (not building 7 different companies) • Rivian is the ONLY other company (besides $TSLA) that has already built a full EV stack: - cutting-edge software - top-tier manufacturing - in-house battery tech - in-house electronics & FSD/AI hardware - in-house top-tier AI and full self driving team - in-house fast-charging network (similar to Tesla super chargers) • Rivian is the ONLY other company that is shipping an 8-camera surround view and powerful onboard computer for FSD in EVERY vehicle. They can collect enormous amounts of real-world video (2nd only to Tesla) to train their AI. Can’t believe no traditional car maker is doing this yet! • Rivian’s FSD/AI team is led by top talent making rapid progress on FSD using latest AI neural net techniques, similar to Tesla’s FSD v12+. • Rivian’s R1 Truck and SUV are both highly rated and loved by customers • Rivian’s Delivery van is a unique offering that is also loved by customers • Rivan’s R2 vehicle (to be launched in 2026) is intended to be high-volume and will likely be a great alternative to the Model Y and drive the company to profitability (note that it doesn't need to beat Model Y...the shift is from gas-cars to EVs). • Rivian’s $5.8B parnership with VW proves that Rivian is FAR ahead in software/tech/electronics than any other traditional car company (remember VW is the world’s largest car manufacturer and they still need Rivian’s help for EVs!) • Rivan’s ~$13 Billion market cap is RIDICULOUSLY LOW for a company that is as accomplished with real-world products that customers love. That said, there are RISKS with Rivian: • Scaling & production challenges could delay Rivian’s progress • They are still losing A LOT of money every quarter and if progress to profitability takes too long, they could run out of money and be forced to raise money at unfavorable terms. But if Rivian becomes a viable and profitable company, in say 5 years from now, producing 500K+ vehicles, it could easily have a $200 Billion valuation (less than 1/7th or 15% of $TSLA’s valuation TODAY!) That’s roughly a 1,500% potential upside, with just a 100% downside, making this bet well worth it for me, even if the probability of success is less than 50/50. So that's why I’m doubling down on $RIVN. 🚀
8:19

Doubling down on my $RIVN Investment! Here are all the reasons why: • Founder RJ (RJ Scaringe), an MIT grad, is brilliant, hands-on, and laser-focused on Rivian (not building 7 different companies) • Rivian is the ONLY other company (besides $TSLA) that has already built a full EV stack: - cutting-edge software - top-tier manufacturing - in-house battery tech - in-house electronics & FSD/AI hardware - in-house top-tier AI and full self driving team - in-house fast-charging network (similar to Tesla super chargers) • Rivian is the ONLY other company that is shipping an 8-camera surround view and powerful onboard computer for FSD in EVERY vehicle. They can collect enormous amounts of real-world video (2nd only to Tesla) to train their AI. Can’t believe no traditional car maker is doing this yet! • Rivian’s FSD/AI team is led by top talent making rapid progress on FSD using latest AI neural net techniques, similar to Tesla’s FSD v12+. • Rivian’s R1 Truck and SUV are both highly rated and loved by customers • Rivian’s Delivery van is a unique offering that is also loved by customers • Rivan’s R2 vehicle (to be launched in 2026) is intended to be high-volume and will likely be a great alternative to the Model Y and drive the company to profitability (note that it doesn't need to beat Model Y...the shift is from gas-cars to EVs). • Rivian’s $5.8B parnership with VW proves that Rivian is FAR ahead in software/tech/electronics than any other traditional car company (remember VW is the world’s largest car manufacturer and they still need Rivian’s help for EVs!) • Rivan’s ~$13 Billion market cap is RIDICULOUSLY LOW for a company that is as accomplished with real-world products that customers love. That said, there are RISKS with Rivian: • Scaling & production challenges could delay Rivian’s progress • They are still losing A LOT of money every quarter and if progress to profitability takes too long, they could run out of money and be forced to raise money at unfavorable terms. But if Rivian becomes a viable and profitable company, in say 5 years from now, producing 500K+ vehicles, it could easily have a $200 Billion valuation (less than 1/7th or 15% of $TSLA’s valuation TODAY!) That’s roughly a 1,500% potential upside, with just a 100% downside, making this bet well worth it for me, even if the probability of success is less than 50/50. So that's why I’m doubling down on $RIVN. 🚀

Hamid

93,818 просмотров • 1 год назад

things keeping me up at night about where AI is actually going: 1. "ambient businesses" are coming. basically, agents monitor the market, handle customers, execute decisions. you check in every few days. 7-8 figure businesses with almost no daily human input. we're early but it's happening. 2. you can now build a company in an hour. grab an idea, vibe code it, add stripe, get a customer. the old timeline was 12 months to first revenue. that's just gone. 3. the internet went app store era → API economy → agent economy. we're now in the part where agents hire other agents on the fly. fixed tech stacks are dissolving. nobody's built the glassdoor for AI agents yet. 4. vertical AI is replacing headcount. that's 10x the market that vertical SaaS ever touched. boring industries like insurance, construction, legal, elder care are the goldmine. 5. SaaS pricing is flipping from per seat to per result. someone is going to build a billion dollar business just by converting legacy SaaS companies to outcome based pricing 6. a whole graveyard of generic SaaS is coming. basic CRMs, analytics dashboards, template marketplaces, scheduling tools. agents just do it better. lots of incumbent saas that are generic and not reinventing themselves right now will struggle/reprice. 7. "human made" is becoming the new luxury. porsche already ran a 100% human made ad campaign. no AI is going to be a premium label like organic is for food. there's a real business in that certification. 8. IRL is having a renaissance. when everything is AI generated, being in a room with other humans becomes scarce. karaoke bars, escape rooms, live music, co-working. the experience economy is accelerating. 9. founder market fit is dead. founder agent fit is what matters now. can you direct a fleet of agents like a film director? that's the new unfair advantage. 10. ghost team org charts are coming. two real people, twelve agents with names, faces, personalities. your about page is going to look the same 11. 1000 true fans is now 100. agents cut your costs so much that 100 customers at $500/mo is a real solo business. micro monopolies across multiple niches. this is the playbook. 12. context window poisoning is the new phishing. cybersecurity hasn't caught up. agents have access to your files, email, bank accounts. bad things are going to happen. it's also a massive startup opportunity. 13. the window is open for maybe 12-24 months. then the moats get built like data, brand, trust, network 14. build cost is basically zero. audiences are underpriced. niches are wide open. idk about you but i'm not sleeping much so much opportunity this is the most asymmetric time to be building a startup. full episode on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 to get your creative juices flowing (latest episode get it where you listen/watch pods) no advertisers, just pure ideas to help you im rooting for you don't just bookmark share with a friend watch
31:36

things keeping me up at night about where AI is actually going: 1. "ambient businesses" are coming. basically, agents monitor the market, handle customers, execute decisions. you check in every few days. 7-8 figure businesses with almost no daily human input. we're early but it's happening. 2. you can now build a company in an hour. grab an idea, vibe code it, add stripe, get a customer. the old timeline was 12 months to first revenue. that's just gone. 3. the internet went app store era → API economy → agent economy. we're now in the part where agents hire other agents on the fly. fixed tech stacks are dissolving. nobody's built the glassdoor for AI agents yet. 4. vertical AI is replacing headcount. that's 10x the market that vertical SaaS ever touched. boring industries like insurance, construction, legal, elder care are the goldmine. 5. SaaS pricing is flipping from per seat to per result. someone is going to build a billion dollar business just by converting legacy SaaS companies to outcome based pricing 6. a whole graveyard of generic SaaS is coming. basic CRMs, analytics dashboards, template marketplaces, scheduling tools. agents just do it better. lots of incumbent saas that are generic and not reinventing themselves right now will struggle/reprice. 7. "human made" is becoming the new luxury. porsche already ran a 100% human made ad campaign. no AI is going to be a premium label like organic is for food. there's a real business in that certification. 8. IRL is having a renaissance. when everything is AI generated, being in a room with other humans becomes scarce. karaoke bars, escape rooms, live music, co-working. the experience economy is accelerating. 9. founder market fit is dead. founder agent fit is what matters now. can you direct a fleet of agents like a film director? that's the new unfair advantage. 10. ghost team org charts are coming. two real people, twelve agents with names, faces, personalities. your about page is going to look the same 11. 1000 true fans is now 100. agents cut your costs so much that 100 customers at $500/mo is a real solo business. micro monopolies across multiple niches. this is the playbook. 12. context window poisoning is the new phishing. cybersecurity hasn't caught up. agents have access to your files, email, bank accounts. bad things are going to happen. it's also a massive startup opportunity. 13. the window is open for maybe 12-24 months. then the moats get built like data, brand, trust, network 14. build cost is basically zero. audiences are underpriced. niches are wide open. idk about you but i'm not sleeping much so much opportunity this is the most asymmetric time to be building a startup. full episode on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 to get your creative juices flowing (latest episode get it where you listen/watch pods) no advertisers, just pure ideas to help you im rooting for you don't just bookmark share with a friend watch

GREG ISENBERG

149,765 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

In 2007, Elon Musk predicted: SpaceX will replace the space shuttle by 2011. Tesla will make a $30,000 car. Solar power will be “a really big deal.” SpaceX had never reached orbit. Tesla had never delivered a car. He spent 20 minutes explaining everything he saw coming: The interviewer pushed back. What about Richard Branson? "What Branson is doing is a much smaller technological challenge. His craft is suborbital. It goes to Mach 3. Our craft is orbital. Mach 25." "But that doesn't describe the whole scale of difficulty. The energy required scales to the square of velocity." "To do what Branson is doing, you need 9 units of energy. To do what we're doing, you need 625." "What Branson is building can cross the English Channel. What we're building can circumnavigate the globe." "I still think what he's doing is great. I bought a ticket on his effort. But it's not in the same league technologically." So what does worry him? "The things that can really hurt SpaceX are our own foolishness. Our own errors. But none of the competition that I'm aware of." This was 2007. SpaceX had never reached orbit. He had already mapped the future. "When the shuttle retires in 2010, starting in 2011, SpaceX's rocket will replace the space shuttle in servicing the space station." It happened. "The Model 2 of Tesla is a $49,000 four-door five-passenger sedan. The Model 3 is intended to be around a $30,000 price point. That's affordable by almost everyone who can buy a new car." It happened. The interviewer asked about his trajectory. From physics at Stanford to Zip2 to PayPal to rockets. "When I graduated from college, there were three areas I thought would be most impactful to the future of humanity." "The internet. Space exploration. And changing the economy from a hydrocarbon-based economy to one which is solar electric." He built companies in all three. The interviewer asked about NASA. "There's a confusion in the public mind that SpaceX is competing with NASA. NASA is a customer of ours." He asked about the space program. "In 1969 we were able to go to the moon. Here we are over three decades later and we can barely get to low Earth orbit. By any measure, that is a step backwards." "If you look at news articles in the late 60s, the expectation was that by the 21st century we would have a moon base and probably a Mars base." "If you'd asked anyone at that point whether we would be unable to go to the moon and not have been to Mars, they would think you're crazy." The interviewer asked about the moon. "I don't think we should be going back to the moon. We should be focused on Mars." "The moon is kind of like the Arctic. Very barren. Very little resources. Not a place we could establish another human civilization." "We saw that movie in the 60s. The remake's never as good." Then came the lifestyle question. You've made a fortune. Ever thought about sitting on a beach drinking beer? "I find that really pretty boring. That would be torture if I had to do that every day." "I really need to be preoccupied with something. If I'm just sitting there relaxing, I can only do that for a very short period of time and then it becomes unbearable." A friend of his has a phrase for startups. "A startup is like eating glass and staring into the abyss." So why do it? "For me it's always about: does what I'm doing matter if we are successful? Does it matter to the world?" "There are easier ways to make money than starting a rocket company or a car company." "The interest in Tesla is not that the world needs another car company. It's that we have a very important environmental problem. Global climate change is going to be one of the most significant issues of the 21st century." "The only way to get around that is with an electric vehicle paired with zero-emission power generation. Solar power is going to be a really big deal." The interviewer asked about selling Tesla to a big car company. "Right now the big car companies believe that a viable electric vehicle is not possible, and even if it was, people wouldn't buy it." "We need to show that neither of those are true. That the technology works. That people want to buy it." "If we sold to one of the big car companies, it would really slow things down." On his daily routine: "I'm not an early morning person. I tend to get up around 7:30 or 8 and be in the office around 9:30. But I stay until about 8pm." On his office: "I just have a cubicle at SpaceX. Surrounded by my colleagues." On legacy: "What I'd like to do is help solve some important problems." "With respect to space, I hope to help make humanity a multiplanetary species." This 20 minute interview will teach you more about vision, ambition, and betting on yourself than every biography combined. Bookmark & give it 20 minutes today, no matter what.
20:05

In 2007, Elon Musk predicted: SpaceX will replace the space shuttle by 2011. Tesla will make a $30,000 car. Solar power will be “a really big deal.” SpaceX had never reached orbit. Tesla had never delivered a car. He spent 20 minutes explaining everything he saw coming: The interviewer pushed back. What about Richard Branson? "What Branson is doing is a much smaller technological challenge. His craft is suborbital. It goes to Mach 3. Our craft is orbital. Mach 25." "But that doesn't describe the whole scale of difficulty. The energy required scales to the square of velocity." "To do what Branson is doing, you need 9 units of energy. To do what we're doing, you need 625." "What Branson is building can cross the English Channel. What we're building can circumnavigate the globe." "I still think what he's doing is great. I bought a ticket on his effort. But it's not in the same league technologically." So what does worry him? "The things that can really hurt SpaceX are our own foolishness. Our own errors. But none of the competition that I'm aware of." This was 2007. SpaceX had never reached orbit. He had already mapped the future. "When the shuttle retires in 2010, starting in 2011, SpaceX's rocket will replace the space shuttle in servicing the space station." It happened. "The Model 2 of Tesla is a $49,000 four-door five-passenger sedan. The Model 3 is intended to be around a $30,000 price point. That's affordable by almost everyone who can buy a new car." It happened. The interviewer asked about his trajectory. From physics at Stanford to Zip2 to PayPal to rockets. "When I graduated from college, there were three areas I thought would be most impactful to the future of humanity." "The internet. Space exploration. And changing the economy from a hydrocarbon-based economy to one which is solar electric." He built companies in all three. The interviewer asked about NASA. "There's a confusion in the public mind that SpaceX is competing with NASA. NASA is a customer of ours." He asked about the space program. "In 1969 we were able to go to the moon. Here we are over three decades later and we can barely get to low Earth orbit. By any measure, that is a step backwards." "If you look at news articles in the late 60s, the expectation was that by the 21st century we would have a moon base and probably a Mars base." "If you'd asked anyone at that point whether we would be unable to go to the moon and not have been to Mars, they would think you're crazy." The interviewer asked about the moon. "I don't think we should be going back to the moon. We should be focused on Mars." "The moon is kind of like the Arctic. Very barren. Very little resources. Not a place we could establish another human civilization." "We saw that movie in the 60s. The remake's never as good." Then came the lifestyle question. You've made a fortune. Ever thought about sitting on a beach drinking beer? "I find that really pretty boring. That would be torture if I had to do that every day." "I really need to be preoccupied with something. If I'm just sitting there relaxing, I can only do that for a very short period of time and then it becomes unbearable." A friend of his has a phrase for startups. "A startup is like eating glass and staring into the abyss." So why do it? "For me it's always about: does what I'm doing matter if we are successful? Does it matter to the world?" "There are easier ways to make money than starting a rocket company or a car company." "The interest in Tesla is not that the world needs another car company. It's that we have a very important environmental problem. Global climate change is going to be one of the most significant issues of the 21st century." "The only way to get around that is with an electric vehicle paired with zero-emission power generation. Solar power is going to be a really big deal." The interviewer asked about selling Tesla to a big car company. "Right now the big car companies believe that a viable electric vehicle is not possible, and even if it was, people wouldn't buy it." "We need to show that neither of those are true. That the technology works. That people want to buy it." "If we sold to one of the big car companies, it would really slow things down." On his daily routine: "I'm not an early morning person. I tend to get up around 7:30 or 8 and be in the office around 9:30. But I stay until about 8pm." On his office: "I just have a cubicle at SpaceX. Surrounded by my colleagues." On legacy: "What I'd like to do is help solve some important problems." "With respect to space, I hope to help make humanity a multiplanetary species." This 20 minute interview will teach you more about vision, ambition, and betting on yourself than every biography combined. Bookmark & give it 20 minutes today, no matter what.

Jaynit

108,376 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🚨Urgent Call for Volunteers in Heartbreaking Search for Missing Navan Teen Benjamin Spot As the search for 14-year-old Benjamin Spot enters its 11th day, local rescue teams are issuing an urgent plea for additional volunteers to bolster efforts along the treacherous River Boyne. The young boy from Johnstown, Navan, vanished without a trace on November 19, leaving his family, friends, and an entire community gripped by fear and determination. Benjamin, described as approximately 5 feet 1 inch tall with blonde hair and blue eyes, was last seen cycling from Navan's Market Square toward the Kentstown Road or Ramparts area around 5: 55 p.m. His bicycle was discovered abandoned at the Ramparts the following morning, sparking immediate concerns that he may have encountered the fast-flowing river nearby. Gardaí, increasingly worried for his safety, now suspect the teen may have fallen into the Boyne, where swollen waters from recent heavy rains have made conditions perilous for searchers. The multi-agency operation, already a beacon of community solidarity, has drawn in specialized units including the Garda Water Unit, Meath River Rescue, Boyne Fishermen's Rescue and Recovery Service, Irish Underwater Search & Rescue (IUSR), Meath Civil Defence, ICV Ireland and the Silverbridge Kayak Club who earlier today discovered the body of 28 year old Jordan Newman who had been missing for almost three weeks. While Gardai have stood down operations for Jordan, vowing to support his family through formal identification, the focus now intensifies on Benjamin. These teams have combed riverbanks, conducted surface drags, and even deployed the Garda helicopter for aerial scans stretching from Navan to Slane. Yet, with high water levels and difficult terrain hindering progress, coordinators say every extra pair of hands counts. "All support is welcome," reads notice in the online video appeal that shows snippets of the muti-agency operation in full force. The appeal, spearheaded by the Irish Community Volunteers (ICV) Ireland, calls on supporters to contact Eamon Murphy on 089 410 8171 or icvireland@gmail.com to join searches focused on the Boyne from Drogheda to Navan. "We're covering counties Meath and Louth, but we need more eyes on the ground and along the water," the message emphasizes, underscoring the raw emotion driving the effort. Benjamin's mother, Renata Molnarova, has made a tearful public plea for her son's safe return. Speaking to reporters earlier she said,"Nobody is going to be in any trouble. We all love Benjamin and we just want him back," she said, her voice cracking with hope amid the heartbreak. Christopher Rennicks of Meath River Rescue, whose volunteers have been on the water daily since Jordan's vanishing, highlighted the emotional toll. "Conditions are quite difficult, but we're used to that. We carry on and hope we can bring some sort of closure to families affected," he told local media. Echoing this resolve, ICV Ireland's Eamon Murphy stressed that no prior experience is needed—just a willingness to help scan banks, distribute flyers, or provide logistical support, however he urged volunteers not to go out alone and to wear suitable clothes for the weather and difficult terrain involved. He continued, "we have reached out to a number of additional search and rescue teams around the country, in particular Wexford and in Limerick as they have the only under water ROV (Remotely operated Vehicle) in the country which would be a significant help in speeding up detection and recovery". Gardaí continue to appeal to the public,having already interviewed many of Benjamin's friends. Anyone with any information is urged to call Navan Garda Station at 046 903 6100
0:34

🚨Urgent Call for Volunteers in Heartbreaking Search for Missing Navan Teen Benjamin Spot As the search for 14-year-old Benjamin Spot enters its 11th day, local rescue teams are issuing an urgent plea for additional volunteers to bolster efforts along the treacherous River Boyne. The young boy from Johnstown, Navan, vanished without a trace on November 19, leaving his family, friends, and an entire community gripped by fear and determination. Benjamin, described as approximately 5 feet 1 inch tall with blonde hair and blue eyes, was last seen cycling from Navan's Market Square toward the Kentstown Road or Ramparts area around 5: 55 p.m. His bicycle was discovered abandoned at the Ramparts the following morning, sparking immediate concerns that he may have encountered the fast-flowing river nearby. Gardaí, increasingly worried for his safety, now suspect the teen may have fallen into the Boyne, where swollen waters from recent heavy rains have made conditions perilous for searchers. The multi-agency operation, already a beacon of community solidarity, has drawn in specialized units including the Garda Water Unit, Meath River Rescue, Boyne Fishermen's Rescue and Recovery Service, Irish Underwater Search & Rescue (IUSR), Meath Civil Defence, ICV Ireland and the Silverbridge Kayak Club who earlier today discovered the body of 28 year old Jordan Newman who had been missing for almost three weeks. While Gardai have stood down operations for Jordan, vowing to support his family through formal identification, the focus now intensifies on Benjamin. These teams have combed riverbanks, conducted surface drags, and even deployed the Garda helicopter for aerial scans stretching from Navan to Slane. Yet, with high water levels and difficult terrain hindering progress, coordinators say every extra pair of hands counts. "All support is welcome," reads notice in the online video appeal that shows snippets of the muti-agency operation in full force. The appeal, spearheaded by the Irish Community Volunteers (ICV) Ireland, calls on supporters to contact Eamon Murphy on 089 410 8171 or [email protected] to join searches focused on the Boyne from Drogheda to Navan. "We're covering counties Meath and Louth, but we need more eyes on the ground and along the water," the message emphasizes, underscoring the raw emotion driving the effort. Benjamin's mother, Renata Molnarova, has made a tearful public plea for her son's safe return. Speaking to reporters earlier she said,"Nobody is going to be in any trouble. We all love Benjamin and we just want him back," she said, her voice cracking with hope amid the heartbreak. Christopher Rennicks of Meath River Rescue, whose volunteers have been on the water daily since Jordan's vanishing, highlighted the emotional toll. "Conditions are quite difficult, but we're used to that. We carry on and hope we can bring some sort of closure to families affected," he told local media. Echoing this resolve, ICV Ireland's Eamon Murphy stressed that no prior experience is needed—just a willingness to help scan banks, distribute flyers, or provide logistical support, however he urged volunteers not to go out alone and to wear suitable clothes for the weather and difficult terrain involved. He continued, "we have reached out to a number of additional search and rescue teams around the country, in particular Wexford and in Limerick as they have the only under water ROV (Remotely operated Vehicle) in the country which would be a significant help in speeding up detection and recovery". Gardaí continue to appeal to the public,having already interviewed many of Benjamin's friends. Anyone with any information is urged to call Navan Garda Station at 046 903 6100

SnDMedia

10,797 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

BREAKING: Bill Ackman just IPO'd his hedge fund. He targeted $25 billion two years ago. He raised $5 billion yesterday. And the retail investors he spent two years courting on X didn't show up. Here's what actually happened, and why it matters for every investor who thinks following a famous name is a strategy. Wednesday, April 29. Bill Ackman rang the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange. Two listed entities hit the market. Pershing Square USA (PSUS), the closed-end fund. Pershing Square Inc. (PS), the asset manager. PSUS priced at $50 a share. It opened at $42. It closed at $40.90. Down 18% on debut. One of the most famous hedge fund managers on the planet went public, and his fund lost nearly a fifth of its value in a single trading session. Now look at how the money actually came in. Of the $5 billion raised, $2.8 billion came from a private placement. Family offices took 30% of that. Pension funds took 25%. Insurance companies took 22%. Ultra-high-net-worth investors took 12%. Institutional investors accounted for over 85% of total orders. The remaining $2.2 billion came from a public offering of 44 million PSUS shares. Some of that was retail. Most of it was not. Ackman has 2 million followers on X. He spent two years marketing this fund as a way for regular people to access hedge fund returns at $50 a share. He even said it on CNBC the morning of the IPO: "Hedge funds are sort of known for managing money for rich people. And now we have the opportunity for someone with $50, could be a long-term shareholder. Usually, the retail gets cut massively back, the institutions are favored. We did the opposite." The retail audience he was talking to didn't believe him. The institutions did. Two years ago, the original target was $25 billion. Yesterday, the final number was $5 billion. That's an 80% downsize. This is one of the most watched investors in the world. He gets booked on every major financial network. He posts daily to millions of followers. He has been pitching this exact deal since 2024. And the deal still came in 80% smaller than planned. Here's the part nobody is connecting: The retail audience for hedge fund products is fundamentally different from the retail audience for personality content. Ackman built a following by being loud on X. Loud on takeovers. Loud on politics. Loud on universities. Loud on ETFs. Loud on macro calls. Followers love that. They follow. They reply. They retweet. But following someone is free. Wiring money into their closed-end fund at NAV with no performance fees and a fee structure most retail investors can't even read is an entirely different decision. The market just made that distinction for him. Now zoom out, because this is the structural lesson. The $2.8 billion private placement was wrapped up before retail even saw the deal. Family offices. Pension funds. Insurance companies. Sovereign wealth. These are the buyers who get the call before the IPO is announced. They get the term sheet. They negotiate. They commit. By the time the public sees the listing on a Wednesday morning, the institutions have already locked in their allocation. The retail investor sees the same news, gets the same prospectus, and reads the same ticker. Different game. Same name on the door. And then PSUS opened down 16% and closed down 18%. Every retail buyer who put in $50 at the IPO price was sitting on a $9 paper loss before lunch. The institutions had locked in better terms in the private placement. Same fund. Same manager. Two completely different starting positions. This is how the structure of capital markets actually works. Every. Single. Time. The brochure says democratization. The cap table says the institutions got there first. This is the same lesson the Blue Owl and BlackRock private credit stories taught us last year. When a famous money manager opens a vehicle to retail, the fine print and the fee structure and the timing of the allocation all favor the people who already have access. You can have a manager with no performance fee, with bonus shares attached, with two million social followers, and a stage on CNBC. The math of who gets in first and at what price is still the math. So what does this mean for you? It means a famous name on the cover is not a strategy. It means following an investor on X is not the same as being invested with them. It means the retail audience for entertaining finance content is enormous, and the retail audience for actually deploying capital into a complex product is not. The wealthy don't pay famous investors for personality. They build systems that don't depend on a single human being having a good year, or a good fund debut, or a good narrative on social media. Ackman's reputation got him on the front page. It didn't get the stock above its IPO price. The math always catches up. The personality doesn't change the math. Boring? Yes. Effective when a $25 billion vision becomes a $5 billion raise that opens down 18%? Also yes. This is exactly why we built Surmount. Automated, rules-based investment strategies. Built for the retail investor who doesn't want to bet a portfolio on whether a famous fund manager has a good debut:
5:01

Sensitive content

BREAKING: Bill Ackman just IPO'd his hedge fund. He targeted $25 billion two years ago. He raised $5 billion yesterday. And the retail investors he spent two years courting on X didn't show up. Here's what actually happened, and why it matters for every investor who thinks following a famous name is a strategy. Wednesday, April 29. Bill Ackman rang the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange. Two listed entities hit the market. Pershing Square USA (PSUS), the closed-end fund. Pershing Square Inc. (PS), the asset manager. PSUS priced at $50 a share. It opened at $42. It closed at $40.90. Down 18% on debut. One of the most famous hedge fund managers on the planet went public, and his fund lost nearly a fifth of its value in a single trading session. Now look at how the money actually came in. Of the $5 billion raised, $2.8 billion came from a private placement. Family offices took 30% of that. Pension funds took 25%. Insurance companies took 22%. Ultra-high-net-worth investors took 12%. Institutional investors accounted for over 85% of total orders. The remaining $2.2 billion came from a public offering of 44 million PSUS shares. Some of that was retail. Most of it was not. Ackman has 2 million followers on X. He spent two years marketing this fund as a way for regular people to access hedge fund returns at $50 a share. He even said it on CNBC the morning of the IPO: "Hedge funds are sort of known for managing money for rich people. And now we have the opportunity for someone with $50, could be a long-term shareholder. Usually, the retail gets cut massively back, the institutions are favored. We did the opposite." The retail audience he was talking to didn't believe him. The institutions did. Two years ago, the original target was $25 billion. Yesterday, the final number was $5 billion. That's an 80% downsize. This is one of the most watched investors in the world. He gets booked on every major financial network. He posts daily to millions of followers. He has been pitching this exact deal since 2024. And the deal still came in 80% smaller than planned. Here's the part nobody is connecting: The retail audience for hedge fund products is fundamentally different from the retail audience for personality content. Ackman built a following by being loud on X. Loud on takeovers. Loud on politics. Loud on universities. Loud on ETFs. Loud on macro calls. Followers love that. They follow. They reply. They retweet. But following someone is free. Wiring money into their closed-end fund at NAV with no performance fees and a fee structure most retail investors can't even read is an entirely different decision. The market just made that distinction for him. Now zoom out, because this is the structural lesson. The $2.8 billion private placement was wrapped up before retail even saw the deal. Family offices. Pension funds. Insurance companies. Sovereign wealth. These are the buyers who get the call before the IPO is announced. They get the term sheet. They negotiate. They commit. By the time the public sees the listing on a Wednesday morning, the institutions have already locked in their allocation. The retail investor sees the same news, gets the same prospectus, and reads the same ticker. Different game. Same name on the door. And then PSUS opened down 16% and closed down 18%. Every retail buyer who put in $50 at the IPO price was sitting on a $9 paper loss before lunch. The institutions had locked in better terms in the private placement. Same fund. Same manager. Two completely different starting positions. This is how the structure of capital markets actually works. Every. Single. Time. The brochure says democratization. The cap table says the institutions got there first. This is the same lesson the Blue Owl and BlackRock private credit stories taught us last year. When a famous money manager opens a vehicle to retail, the fine print and the fee structure and the timing of the allocation all favor the people who already have access. You can have a manager with no performance fee, with bonus shares attached, with two million social followers, and a stage on CNBC. The math of who gets in first and at what price is still the math. So what does this mean for you? It means a famous name on the cover is not a strategy. It means following an investor on X is not the same as being invested with them. It means the retail audience for entertaining finance content is enormous, and the retail audience for actually deploying capital into a complex product is not. The wealthy don't pay famous investors for personality. They build systems that don't depend on a single human being having a good year, or a good fund debut, or a good narrative on social media. Ackman's reputation got him on the front page. It didn't get the stock above its IPO price. The math always catches up. The personality doesn't change the math. Boring? Yes. Effective when a $25 billion vision becomes a $5 billion raise that opens down 18%? Also yes. This is exactly why we built Surmount. Automated, rules-based investment strategies. Built for the retail investor who doesn't want to bet a portfolio on whether a famous fund manager has a good debut:

Logan Weaver

220,960 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🇷🇺🚀 RANGE BUYS THE LAUNCHER TIME. PRODUCTION WINS THE WAR. The first confirmed combat use of Russia’s upgraded 9M723-2 — provisionally tagged Iskander-1000 and fielded with the Bora-M launcher — is not a science-fiction leap to a thousand kilometres. It is something more Russian, and more dangerous to NATO planning: an extra one hundred and sixty kilometres of depth added to a missile already built, already stockpiled, already understood by the crews who fire it. 🇷🇺 Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence said the new round was used in a combined strike on Kiev this summer, that it belongs to a system called Bora-M, and that the fielded missile reaches about 550 kilometres against roughly 390 for the 9M723-1. Defence Blog, RBC-Ukraine and UK Defence Journal all carried the same core claim within a day. The name still oversells the round that actually flew. The 1,000-kilometre figure belongs to a further stretch still in development. That distinction matters. So does the fact that Moscow did not wait for the brochure range before putting extra depth into the fight. The question that follows is the only one that counts for a war of attrition. Which matters more: the extra range, or the accuracy and production tempo of a design Russia already manufactures at scale? NOT A NEW MISSILE. A DEEPER ONE. Most of the 9M723-2 remains the same family Russia has used for years. Public assessments, including the Ukrainian disclosure itself, say the principal change is a larger motor and a launcher able to carry it. Everything else — the quasi-ballistic profile, the short warning time, the mobile transporter-erector-launcher logic — stays inside a system the industry already knows how to build. 🇷🇺 That is the point Western commentary keeps missing. A clean-sheet intermediate-range missile would have been a prestige project and a production bottleneck. An enlarged Iskander is a factory decision. Military Watch Magazine, writing from the other side of the ledger than Kiev, has treated the programme as a doubling of the old five-hundred-kilometre class by carrying more energy in a familiar airframe rather than inventing a new architecture. Russian military analyst Evgeny Damantsev, in a series of briefings carried by Russian technical outlets, has described the same logic since 2024: keep the 9M723 layout, raise the energy of the motor, accept a lighter warhead on the longest shots, and put the result on a high-mobility ground launcher instead of waiting for a bomber or a ship. Telegram channel Russkoe Oruzhie went further in January, claiming a high-impulse motor and a thousand-kilometre class of flight. The Russian Defence Ministry has issued no matching communique. That silence is useful. It leaves the fielded 550-kilometre Bora-M shot as the fact, and the 1,000-kilometre talk as the programme horizon. A serious general staff can use both numbers without confusing them. EXTRA ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY KILOMETRES OF HUNTING GROUND** Range is not a vanity statistic. It is geography. An extra 160 kilometres means the same target set — Kiev and other deep objectives — can be held at risk from launch areas that used to sit outside the old envelope. Crews can disperse across a wider belt of Russian and rear territory, fire, and move again before NATO-supported sensors finish the hunt. 🛰️🇷🇺 Ukrainian aviation commentator Kostiantyn Kryvolap, speaking to RBC-Ukraine, sketched the old problem in the opposite direction: with a 390-kilometre missile, a shot at Kiev pulled launchers toward more exposed ground. Stretch the reach and the launcher park expands. Every extra kilometre is another forest track, another decoy set, another place a HIMARS or drone team has to search before the vehicle is gone. The hunter’s problem scales with area. The shooter’s problem does not scale as fast, because the crew still needs only minutes on the pad. Russian open-source commentary quoted in Western leak round-ups made the reconnaissance point in blunt language: American missile-warning constellations do not get a polite label on the plume that says “this one is the short Iskander” or “this one is the long one.” The defender has to treat a larger rear as live. Aircraft and air-defence radars that light up to cover that rear advertise themselves. That is not a video-game mechanic. It is the old Soviet preference for forcing the opponent to defend everywhere so he can be strong nowhere. Military Watch Magazine’s August assessment pushed the same geography onto the European map. After a combat trial in the Ukrainian theatre, the magazine and Russian-side speculation it cited pointed to Kaliningrad as the logical later home for a longer Iskander class — a deployment that, if the full programme range is ever reached, would put much of Central Europe and the Baltic inside a mobile ground battery’s arc. Even the more conservative 550-kilometre figure already changes the hunt inside the current war. The thousand-kilometre talk is the next planning problem for NATO, not the round that just flew. THE PROFILE THAT STILL STEALS MINUTES The Iskander family was never a simple lofted ballistic arc. It is a fast, maneuvering quasi-ballistic shot that compresses the defender’s decision cycle. Patriot and similar batteries do not get a leisurely track. They get minutes. Russian analysts have been explicit about that for years. Damantsev put the optical-satellite warning window for a future thousand-kilometre class at two to seven minutes depending on the target’s distance. Aleksey Leonkov, speaking to about the same family, stressed irregular pitch and yaw in the terminal phase — a path that is ugly for a fire-control computer that wants a predictable intercept point. 🇷🇺 None of that required a new nameplate. The upgraded missile, on every serious account, keeps the family flight profile and adds reach. The interception problem is therefore not “a brand-new physics package.” It is the old physics package arriving from a wider set of azimuths, launched from a deeper set of hide sites, in salvos already mixed with drones and cruise missiles. Combined strikes are how Russia has used the Iskander for a long time. Extra range simply lets those salvos be generated from safer ground. RUSI’s earlier technical profile of the Iskander-M and Iskander-K remains the useful Western baseline: a mobile two-round launcher, a quasi-ballistic missile with a steep terminal dive, and enough seeker options to make the system more than a dumb range stick. The 9M723-2, if the Ukrainian and Russian-side descriptions are both even half right, is that baseline with more motor and a bigger tube. The defender who hoped the upgrade would force Russia into a clumsy new missile that factories cannot build is waiting for a gift Moscow declined to give. WHAT THE RUSSIAN ANALYSTS ACTUALLY ARGUED Damantsev’s public case, repeated across 2024–2026 Russian technical coverage, is not “build a wonder weapon.” It is “put medium-range fire on a truck that can hide.” He argued that ground launchers with signature-reduction kits can occupy firing points without the infrared circus of a Tu-95, a surface ship or a MiG-31K taking off. Once the motor lights, satellites will see the plume. The remaining flight is then a handful of minutes. The correct industrial answer, in his view, was to prioritise series production of a longer Iskander class rather than treat it as a boutique test article. That is an argument about factories and basing, not about magic fuel. Military Watch Magazine’s January 2025 preview and its August 2026 combat-debut note form a single through-line. First: a derivative that aims to double the old treaty-era envelope after Washington walked out of the INF Treaty. Second: a first combat use, with Russian sources already talking Kaliningrad as the European follow-on. The magazine also flagged a second industrial effect. A longer domestic ballistic round reduces the need to lean on imported short-range ballistic types of similar reach. Whether one accepts every kilometre in those essays or not, the strategic preference is consistent. Russia wants a mobile, ground-based shot that NATO cannot archive as “only 500 kilometres, only from the old pads.” Leonkov’s commentary to sits in the same school: the value of the family is not a straight line on a map but an ugly line in the sky. A missile that yaws and pitches on the way down is a missile that spends the defender’s interceptors. Pair that with a launcher that no longer has to creep toward the border and the system starts to look like what Soviet designers always wanted after the Oka was bargained away — a precise operational-tactical stick that lives far enough back to survive. None of those voices should be treated as official range tables. They should be treated as the Russian debate that actually happened: stretch the existing missile, keep it mobile, make the West search a larger map, and do not wait for a perfect thousand-kilometre round if a 550-kilometre round is already on a truck. THE FACTORY IS THE OTHER WARHEAD Accuracy without inventory is a demonstration. Inventory without accuracy is harassment. Russia’s advantage on this family is that both already exist. Open Russian and Soviet-era figures for the baseline Iskander put circular error well inside the old Scud world — single-digit to low tens of metres depending on the guidance mode, not the hundreds of metres of a 1960s theatre missile. RUSI noted the electro-optical seeker path that pulled CEP down into the kind of band that can hit a radar or a launcher, not merely a district. That accuracy is why the system is used against air-defence positions and command nodes rather than as a city-flattening area weapon of last resort. Production is the multiplier. Ukrainian researcher Oleksandr Zaruba told Interfax-Ukraine in June that Russia was turning out about sixty Iskander-M ballistic missiles a month and about ten Iskander-K cruise missiles. Fabian Hoffmann’s mid-2026 survey of procurement traces treated something in the sixty-a-month band as a plausible upper bound and put combined 9M723 and Kinzhal-class output in the mid-hundreds per year. Those numbers will be argued over. What they are not is a cottage industry. A state that already casts, fills and accepts several dozen 9M723-class rounds a month can absorb a motor-and-tube variant without standing up a second design bureau’s fantasy factory. Procurement traces published in 2025 already showed a small first batch of eighteen missiles under the 9M723-2 designation. That is how a conservative industry introduces a longer round: a pilot lot, a combat trial, then a decision about how much of the monthly sixty becomes the new standard. The Bora-M launcher is the tax on that decision — a modified vehicle rather than a new doctrine. Kryvolap himself, no friend of the programme, called the launcher a stronger set of rails and a tougher structure, not a revolution. That is faint praise from the other side, and it is the praise that should worry NATO. Revolutions slip. Line extensions ship. WHICH MATTERS MORE? Longer range matters because it keeps the launcher alive. Accuracy matters because a missile that lands in the next block wastes a scarce airframe. Speed of production matters because a theatre war is a contest of magazines, not of first-shot press releases. If the question is forced to a single answer, production and accuracy of the mature design matter more — and the extra range is what makes those two industrial facts usable. 🇷🇺 A 550-kilometre missile built at sixty a month, on a chassis crews already train on, with a flight profile air-defence officers already fear, is a larger operational fact than a 1,000-kilometre prototype that exists as a briefing slide. The 160-kilometre bonus is the difference between parking the battery in a hunted belt and parking it in a belt the hunter has not staffed. It does not replace the factory. It gives the factory’s output somewhere safer to live. That is why the upgrade path is the story, not the nickname. Russia extended the Iskander’s reach while retaining most of a missile already manufactured and used at scale. NATO-backed intelligence now has to watch more ground, sort real launchers from decoys, and get coordinates to a Ukrainian shooter before the vehicle moves. The interceptor still has only minutes after the plume. The seeker still has to solve a maneuvering endgame. The plant in the Iskander chain still has a monthly number to hit. The thousand-kilometre chapter, if and when it is certified, will be a European planning problem. The 550-kilometre chapter is already a Ukrainian one. Military Watch can talk Kaliningrad. Damantsev can talk two-to-seven-minute warning. GUR can insist the name is a lie and the range is 550. All three statements can be true at once. The lie in the nickname does not cancel the extra depth. The extra depth does not cancel the fact that the same industry is still pouring the standard missile. WHAT THIS DOES TO THE MAP For the current war, the practical effect is simple. Targets that used to require a launcher to edge forward can be held at risk from further back. The search radius for counter-battery and drone hunters grows. Combined night salvos still arrive in minutes. The defender’s Patriot crews do not receive a new law of physics. They receive the old law from more compass points. 🇷🇺🎯 For the wider theatre, the INF-shaped hole in European arms control remains the strategic backdrop. Washington left the treaty. Moscow is filling the gap with the family it already owns rather than with a museum piece. A mobile ground missile that can grow from the old treaty-safe band toward a genuine intermediate-range band is exactly the system a continental power wants when the other side talks about moving its own long-range batteries onto German soil. Damantsev said that part out loud years ago. The summer shot at Kiev is the first unpaid advertisement. None of this requires pretending the fielded round is a 1,000-kilometre weapon. Honesty is a weapon too. Call the Bora-M missile a 550-kilometre Iskander with more hide space. Call the thousand-kilometre project the next increment. Then look at the production line. A state that can keep the old missile flowing while feeding a longer cousin into the same crews has chosen the unromantic path: stretch what works, hide the truck, and let the magazine do the rest. That is the Russian answer to the question. Range keeps the launcher on the board. Accuracy makes each round worth the propellant. Production decides whether the board still has pieces on it in the sixth month and the eighteenth. The 9M723-2 is not a miracle. It is a deeper Iskander. In a long war, that is the upgrade that the Enemy will feel the consequences . 🇷🇺🚀
0:37

🇷🇺🚀 RANGE BUYS THE LAUNCHER TIME. PRODUCTION WINS THE WAR. The first confirmed combat use of Russia’s upgraded 9M723-2 — provisionally tagged Iskander-1000 and fielded with the Bora-M launcher — is not a science-fiction leap to a thousand kilometres. It is something more Russian, and more dangerous to NATO planning: an extra one hundred and sixty kilometres of depth added to a missile already built, already stockpiled, already understood by the crews who fire it. 🇷🇺 Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence said the new round was used in a combined strike on Kiev this summer, that it belongs to a system called Bora-M, and that the fielded missile reaches about 550 kilometres against roughly 390 for the 9M723-1. Defence Blog, RBC-Ukraine and UK Defence Journal all carried the same core claim within a day. The name still oversells the round that actually flew. The 1,000-kilometre figure belongs to a further stretch still in development. That distinction matters. So does the fact that Moscow did not wait for the brochure range before putting extra depth into the fight. The question that follows is the only one that counts for a war of attrition. Which matters more: the extra range, or the accuracy and production tempo of a design Russia already manufactures at scale? NOT A NEW MISSILE. A DEEPER ONE. Most of the 9M723-2 remains the same family Russia has used for years. Public assessments, including the Ukrainian disclosure itself, say the principal change is a larger motor and a launcher able to carry it. Everything else — the quasi-ballistic profile, the short warning time, the mobile transporter-erector-launcher logic — stays inside a system the industry already knows how to build. 🇷🇺 That is the point Western commentary keeps missing. A clean-sheet intermediate-range missile would have been a prestige project and a production bottleneck. An enlarged Iskander is a factory decision. Military Watch Magazine, writing from the other side of the ledger than Kiev, has treated the programme as a doubling of the old five-hundred-kilometre class by carrying more energy in a familiar airframe rather than inventing a new architecture. Russian military analyst Evgeny Damantsev, in a series of briefings carried by Russian technical outlets, has described the same logic since 2024: keep the 9M723 layout, raise the energy of the motor, accept a lighter warhead on the longest shots, and put the result on a high-mobility ground launcher instead of waiting for a bomber or a ship. Telegram channel Russkoe Oruzhie went further in January, claiming a high-impulse motor and a thousand-kilometre class of flight. The Russian Defence Ministry has issued no matching communique. That silence is useful. It leaves the fielded 550-kilometre Bora-M shot as the fact, and the 1,000-kilometre talk as the programme horizon. A serious general staff can use both numbers without confusing them. EXTRA ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY KILOMETRES OF HUNTING GROUND** Range is not a vanity statistic. It is geography. An extra 160 kilometres means the same target set — Kiev and other deep objectives — can be held at risk from launch areas that used to sit outside the old envelope. Crews can disperse across a wider belt of Russian and rear territory, fire, and move again before NATO-supported sensors finish the hunt. 🛰️🇷🇺 Ukrainian aviation commentator Kostiantyn Kryvolap, speaking to RBC-Ukraine, sketched the old problem in the opposite direction: with a 390-kilometre missile, a shot at Kiev pulled launchers toward more exposed ground. Stretch the reach and the launcher park expands. Every extra kilometre is another forest track, another decoy set, another place a HIMARS or drone team has to search before the vehicle is gone. The hunter’s problem scales with area. The shooter’s problem does not scale as fast, because the crew still needs only minutes on the pad. Russian open-source commentary quoted in Western leak round-ups made the reconnaissance point in blunt language: American missile-warning constellations do not get a polite label on the plume that says “this one is the short Iskander” or “this one is the long one.” The defender has to treat a larger rear as live. Aircraft and air-defence radars that light up to cover that rear advertise themselves. That is not a video-game mechanic. It is the old Soviet preference for forcing the opponent to defend everywhere so he can be strong nowhere. Military Watch Magazine’s August assessment pushed the same geography onto the European map. After a combat trial in the Ukrainian theatre, the magazine and Russian-side speculation it cited pointed to Kaliningrad as the logical later home for a longer Iskander class — a deployment that, if the full programme range is ever reached, would put much of Central Europe and the Baltic inside a mobile ground battery’s arc. Even the more conservative 550-kilometre figure already changes the hunt inside the current war. The thousand-kilometre talk is the next planning problem for NATO, not the round that just flew. THE PROFILE THAT STILL STEALS MINUTES The Iskander family was never a simple lofted ballistic arc. It is a fast, maneuvering quasi-ballistic shot that compresses the defender’s decision cycle. Patriot and similar batteries do not get a leisurely track. They get minutes. Russian analysts have been explicit about that for years. Damantsev put the optical-satellite warning window for a future thousand-kilometre class at two to seven minutes depending on the target’s distance. Aleksey Leonkov, speaking to about the same family, stressed irregular pitch and yaw in the terminal phase — a path that is ugly for a fire-control computer that wants a predictable intercept point. 🇷🇺 None of that required a new nameplate. The upgraded missile, on every serious account, keeps the family flight profile and adds reach. The interception problem is therefore not “a brand-new physics package.” It is the old physics package arriving from a wider set of azimuths, launched from a deeper set of hide sites, in salvos already mixed with drones and cruise missiles. Combined strikes are how Russia has used the Iskander for a long time. Extra range simply lets those salvos be generated from safer ground. RUSI’s earlier technical profile of the Iskander-M and Iskander-K remains the useful Western baseline: a mobile two-round launcher, a quasi-ballistic missile with a steep terminal dive, and enough seeker options to make the system more than a dumb range stick. The 9M723-2, if the Ukrainian and Russian-side descriptions are both even half right, is that baseline with more motor and a bigger tube. The defender who hoped the upgrade would force Russia into a clumsy new missile that factories cannot build is waiting for a gift Moscow declined to give. WHAT THE RUSSIAN ANALYSTS ACTUALLY ARGUED Damantsev’s public case, repeated across 2024–2026 Russian technical coverage, is not “build a wonder weapon.” It is “put medium-range fire on a truck that can hide.” He argued that ground launchers with signature-reduction kits can occupy firing points without the infrared circus of a Tu-95, a surface ship or a MiG-31K taking off. Once the motor lights, satellites will see the plume. The remaining flight is then a handful of minutes. The correct industrial answer, in his view, was to prioritise series production of a longer Iskander class rather than treat it as a boutique test article. That is an argument about factories and basing, not about magic fuel. Military Watch Magazine’s January 2025 preview and its August 2026 combat-debut note form a single through-line. First: a derivative that aims to double the old treaty-era envelope after Washington walked out of the INF Treaty. Second: a first combat use, with Russian sources already talking Kaliningrad as the European follow-on. The magazine also flagged a second industrial effect. A longer domestic ballistic round reduces the need to lean on imported short-range ballistic types of similar reach. Whether one accepts every kilometre in those essays or not, the strategic preference is consistent. Russia wants a mobile, ground-based shot that NATO cannot archive as “only 500 kilometres, only from the old pads.” Leonkov’s commentary to sits in the same school: the value of the family is not a straight line on a map but an ugly line in the sky. A missile that yaws and pitches on the way down is a missile that spends the defender’s interceptors. Pair that with a launcher that no longer has to creep toward the border and the system starts to look like what Soviet designers always wanted after the Oka was bargained away — a precise operational-tactical stick that lives far enough back to survive. None of those voices should be treated as official range tables. They should be treated as the Russian debate that actually happened: stretch the existing missile, keep it mobile, make the West search a larger map, and do not wait for a perfect thousand-kilometre round if a 550-kilometre round is already on a truck. THE FACTORY IS THE OTHER WARHEAD Accuracy without inventory is a demonstration. Inventory without accuracy is harassment. Russia’s advantage on this family is that both already exist. Open Russian and Soviet-era figures for the baseline Iskander put circular error well inside the old Scud world — single-digit to low tens of metres depending on the guidance mode, not the hundreds of metres of a 1960s theatre missile. RUSI noted the electro-optical seeker path that pulled CEP down into the kind of band that can hit a radar or a launcher, not merely a district. That accuracy is why the system is used against air-defence positions and command nodes rather than as a city-flattening area weapon of last resort. Production is the multiplier. Ukrainian researcher Oleksandr Zaruba told Interfax-Ukraine in June that Russia was turning out about sixty Iskander-M ballistic missiles a month and about ten Iskander-K cruise missiles. Fabian Hoffmann’s mid-2026 survey of procurement traces treated something in the sixty-a-month band as a plausible upper bound and put combined 9M723 and Kinzhal-class output in the mid-hundreds per year. Those numbers will be argued over. What they are not is a cottage industry. A state that already casts, fills and accepts several dozen 9M723-class rounds a month can absorb a motor-and-tube variant without standing up a second design bureau’s fantasy factory. Procurement traces published in 2025 already showed a small first batch of eighteen missiles under the 9M723-2 designation. That is how a conservative industry introduces a longer round: a pilot lot, a combat trial, then a decision about how much of the monthly sixty becomes the new standard. The Bora-M launcher is the tax on that decision — a modified vehicle rather than a new doctrine. Kryvolap himself, no friend of the programme, called the launcher a stronger set of rails and a tougher structure, not a revolution. That is faint praise from the other side, and it is the praise that should worry NATO. Revolutions slip. Line extensions ship. WHICH MATTERS MORE? Longer range matters because it keeps the launcher alive. Accuracy matters because a missile that lands in the next block wastes a scarce airframe. Speed of production matters because a theatre war is a contest of magazines, not of first-shot press releases. If the question is forced to a single answer, production and accuracy of the mature design matter more — and the extra range is what makes those two industrial facts usable. 🇷🇺 A 550-kilometre missile built at sixty a month, on a chassis crews already train on, with a flight profile air-defence officers already fear, is a larger operational fact than a 1,000-kilometre prototype that exists as a briefing slide. The 160-kilometre bonus is the difference between parking the battery in a hunted belt and parking it in a belt the hunter has not staffed. It does not replace the factory. It gives the factory’s output somewhere safer to live. That is why the upgrade path is the story, not the nickname. Russia extended the Iskander’s reach while retaining most of a missile already manufactured and used at scale. NATO-backed intelligence now has to watch more ground, sort real launchers from decoys, and get coordinates to a Ukrainian shooter before the vehicle moves. The interceptor still has only minutes after the plume. The seeker still has to solve a maneuvering endgame. The plant in the Iskander chain still has a monthly number to hit. The thousand-kilometre chapter, if and when it is certified, will be a European planning problem. The 550-kilometre chapter is already a Ukrainian one. Military Watch can talk Kaliningrad. Damantsev can talk two-to-seven-minute warning. GUR can insist the name is a lie and the range is 550. All three statements can be true at once. The lie in the nickname does not cancel the extra depth. The extra depth does not cancel the fact that the same industry is still pouring the standard missile. WHAT THIS DOES TO THE MAP For the current war, the practical effect is simple. Targets that used to require a launcher to edge forward can be held at risk from further back. The search radius for counter-battery and drone hunters grows. Combined night salvos still arrive in minutes. The defender’s Patriot crews do not receive a new law of physics. They receive the old law from more compass points. 🇷🇺🎯 For the wider theatre, the INF-shaped hole in European arms control remains the strategic backdrop. Washington left the treaty. Moscow is filling the gap with the family it already owns rather than with a museum piece. A mobile ground missile that can grow from the old treaty-safe band toward a genuine intermediate-range band is exactly the system a continental power wants when the other side talks about moving its own long-range batteries onto German soil. Damantsev said that part out loud years ago. The summer shot at Kiev is the first unpaid advertisement. None of this requires pretending the fielded round is a 1,000-kilometre weapon. Honesty is a weapon too. Call the Bora-M missile a 550-kilometre Iskander with more hide space. Call the thousand-kilometre project the next increment. Then look at the production line. A state that can keep the old missile flowing while feeding a longer cousin into the same crews has chosen the unromantic path: stretch what works, hide the truck, and let the magazine do the rest. That is the Russian answer to the question. Range keeps the launcher on the board. Accuracy makes each round worth the propellant. Production decides whether the board still has pieces on it in the sixth month and the eighteenth. The 9M723-2 is not a miracle. It is a deeper Iskander. In a long war, that is the upgrade that the Enemy will feel the consequences . 🇷🇺🚀

𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝 𝐙 🇷🇺 🇷🇸🇮🇪

19,218 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Ali Ghodsi never wanted to be CEO. In 2015, he was interviewing for a professor job at Berkeley when the Databricks board handed him the interim title. Revenue that year was $1.5M. This episode with Ali Ghodsi will go down as one of my favorites. 10 things I took away: 1. Focus the entire company, orders of magnitude of attention, on its single biggest bottleneck. Like a laser, almost to an extreme. The cycle is 1-3 years, not weeks. If your focus changes weekly, then you’re just in firefighting mode. 2. There is nothing worse than a conflict-averse CEO. They are wonderful people, but they are in the wrong job. Conflict is the gym for a CEO: nobody likes it, but everyone has to go. 3. Study your enemy carefully, understand their weaknesses and apply your strengths to those weaknesses. Snowflake had 2x his revenue. He didn’t copy them. He found three weaknesses (proprietary, no AI, expensive) and hammered them account by account for four years. Watch the competition, never follow it. 4. The concept of a Lakehouse was ridiculed internally and online. No one wanted to market with this new term. So he made the whole company religious about it anyway, killed the ads that converted better without the word, and put it in the sales comp plan. It worked. All hands on deck, no exceptions. 5. Be willing to take a step back for a much bigger vision, even when the company is already succeeding. At multiple hundreds of millions in ARR, he was unhappy, because the vision he pitched investors wasn’t the company he was running. So he took one step back to go ten forward. 6. On the flat org, player-coach model that a lot of people have talked about this year: “it’s BS.” Separate how the company thinks (AI, ontology) from how the humans get managed (they are after all, still humans). His staff meets 3x a week. I asked if it could just be coordinated in a Google doc. His answer: do you meet your wife and kids, or coordinate that in a Google doc? 7. His test for a sales leader: can they build the car, or just drive it? Ron Gabrisko, the Databricks CRO, had seen $0→50M and $50→100M+, and hadn’t changed jobs in 10 years prior to joining. Now he has been the CRO for over a decade. He built and drove the car the whole way. That almost never happens. 8. Hire execs ahead of the curve because by the time you need them, it’s too late. A real search takes 6-12 months. The extra time helps you increase false negatives and decrease false positives. Do an insane number of backdoor references because 80% of ‘front door’ references are bs. 9. The best salespeople are not super technical, so stop trying to force them to be. Square peg, round hole. The best win with professional aggression, high EQ, and mapping the real power base (how decisions get made high up in an organization), not technical depth. 10. Yes, your best AEs will annoy people. One of the first at Databricks got a meeting nobody could get, but got banned from the customer’s building for it. He told Ali, “what are you complaining about? I got the meeting.” Professionally aggressive is the bar. One bottleneck, zero wussing out. He reminds me of Elon Musk that way. Chapters 0:00 – Introduction 1:22 – The secret CEO search and why the board bet on a founder 4:11 – Professor or CEO? Always taking the harder option 8:18 – Pour everything into one bottleneck 12:16 – Killing PLG and learning what great enterprise sellers actually have 19:09 – Hiring ahead of the curve: sales leaders, execs, and back-door references 27:02 – The Snowflake rivalry: study your enemy, never copy them 33:22 – Lakehouse: conviction, ridicule, and the case for second acts 41:02 – The killer instinct and why conflict-averse CEOs fail 44:10 – Dunbar's number and rethinking the org chart around AI 48:00 – AGI is already here — enterprises just use it as a chatbot 52:55 – Does he still code? Two days for a connector vs. three quarters 57:18 – A day in the life, and why the Monday meeting isn't theater 1:04:53 – Why Databricks will go public, just not yet 1:08:09 – Get over conflict aversion, or don't be CEO 1:11:07 – Brian's takeaways Link to more in the comments.
1:14:29

Ali Ghodsi never wanted to be CEO. In 2015, he was interviewing for a professor job at Berkeley when the Databricks board handed him the interim title. Revenue that year was $1.5M. This episode with Ali Ghodsi will go down as one of my favorites. 10 things I took away: 1. Focus the entire company, orders of magnitude of attention, on its single biggest bottleneck. Like a laser, almost to an extreme. The cycle is 1-3 years, not weeks. If your focus changes weekly, then you’re just in firefighting mode. 2. There is nothing worse than a conflict-averse CEO. They are wonderful people, but they are in the wrong job. Conflict is the gym for a CEO: nobody likes it, but everyone has to go. 3. Study your enemy carefully, understand their weaknesses and apply your strengths to those weaknesses. Snowflake had 2x his revenue. He didn’t copy them. He found three weaknesses (proprietary, no AI, expensive) and hammered them account by account for four years. Watch the competition, never follow it. 4. The concept of a Lakehouse was ridiculed internally and online. No one wanted to market with this new term. So he made the whole company religious about it anyway, killed the ads that converted better without the word, and put it in the sales comp plan. It worked. All hands on deck, no exceptions. 5. Be willing to take a step back for a much bigger vision, even when the company is already succeeding. At multiple hundreds of millions in ARR, he was unhappy, because the vision he pitched investors wasn’t the company he was running. So he took one step back to go ten forward. 6. On the flat org, player-coach model that a lot of people have talked about this year: “it’s BS.” Separate how the company thinks (AI, ontology) from how the humans get managed (they are after all, still humans). His staff meets 3x a week. I asked if it could just be coordinated in a Google doc. His answer: do you meet your wife and kids, or coordinate that in a Google doc? 7. His test for a sales leader: can they build the car, or just drive it? Ron Gabrisko, the Databricks CRO, had seen $0→50M and $50→100M+, and hadn’t changed jobs in 10 years prior to joining. Now he has been the CRO for over a decade. He built and drove the car the whole way. That almost never happens. 8. Hire execs ahead of the curve because by the time you need them, it’s too late. A real search takes 6-12 months. The extra time helps you increase false negatives and decrease false positives. Do an insane number of backdoor references because 80% of ‘front door’ references are bs. 9. The best salespeople are not super technical, so stop trying to force them to be. Square peg, round hole. The best win with professional aggression, high EQ, and mapping the real power base (how decisions get made high up in an organization), not technical depth. 10. Yes, your best AEs will annoy people. One of the first at Databricks got a meeting nobody could get, but got banned from the customer’s building for it. He told Ali, “what are you complaining about? I got the meeting.” Professionally aggressive is the bar. One bottleneck, zero wussing out. He reminds me of Elon Musk that way. Chapters 0:00 – Introduction 1:22 – The secret CEO search and why the board bet on a founder 4:11 – Professor or CEO? Always taking the harder option 8:18 – Pour everything into one bottleneck 12:16 – Killing PLG and learning what great enterprise sellers actually have 19:09 – Hiring ahead of the curve: sales leaders, execs, and back-door references 27:02 – The Snowflake rivalry: study your enemy, never copy them 33:22 – Lakehouse: conviction, ridicule, and the case for second acts 41:02 – The killer instinct and why conflict-averse CEOs fail 44:10 – Dunbar's number and rethinking the org chart around AI 48:00 – AGI is already here — enterprises just use it as a chatbot 52:55 – Does he still code? Two days for a connector vs. three quarters 57:18 – A day in the life, and why the Monday meeting isn't theater 1:04:53 – Why Databricks will go public, just not yet 1:08:09 – Get over conflict aversion, or don't be CEO 1:11:07 – Brian's takeaways Link to more in the comments.

Brian Halligan

194,703 просмотров • 25 дней назад

THIS IS THE NEXT BIG UK SCANDAL You go to your bank for a loan. What you actually get is a bomb with a timer on it, and the bank keeps the detonator. That is the Hidden Credit Line scandal It has been running since the 2000s. Here is how it worked. Banks including NatWest (NatWest Group), Royal Bank of Scotland (Royal Bank) and Ulster Bank (Ulster Bank) sold business owners what looked like an ordinary loan. Attached to it was an interest rate swap, marketed as protection if rates went up. What it actually did was build a hidden credit line into the deal, extra exposure booked against the customer's own assets that they were never clearly told about. When rates fell after 2008, banks used that hidden exposure to call in debts, strip assets and push profitable businesses into insolvency. Two men refused to let this disappear. Steve Middleton (stephen middleton) and Mark Wright, a former RBS manager, built BankConfidential (BankConfidential) to collect the evidence the banks hoped would stay buried. Mark Wright funded years of the work with roughly £60,000 of his own pension. He also named the individual who taught bank trainees... ... how to forge customer signatures. Neither man made a penny from any of it. Both watched their careers end for telling the truth. In November 2022, Steve Middleton, Lord Prem Sikka (Prem Sikka) and derivatives expert Ian Tyler sat down with the Financial Conduct Authority (Financial Conduct Authority) and showed the whole thing in detail. The Times and Sunday Times journalist James Hurley (James Hurley) had already written four separate articles calling it financial and accounting fraud, including what he described as theft from Ulster Bank fixed rate loan customers. The FCA let NatWest mark its own homework, then concluded the fraud was not technically criminal fraud. A regulator investigating fraud and ruling that fraud is fine as long as nobody gets arrested for it. In November 2025, BankConfidential published their full report, modestly titled the largest fraud anywhere ever. Five months later, on 14 April 2026, it forced a Westminster Hall debate led by John McDonnell MP (John McDonnell), chair of the APPG on Investment Fraud and Fairer Financial Services (Investment Fraud and Fairer Financial Services). MPs read out the human cost. Catherine and Nigel Jarvis, told their losses were not foreseeable by a bank that had built those losses into the product from the start. Stephen and Gloria Lilley, personal guarantors on their own home, refused basic information about the size of the liability they were personally guaranteeing. MPs asked for one thing, a fully independent judge led statutory inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005. Before this request there had already been the Foskett panel, the Swift review, the Cranston review, the Tomlinson report, the Project Lord Turnbull report by Sally Masterton and a full parliamentary commission on banking standards. Six reviews, zero justice. This would have been the seventh. Ian Byrne MP (lan Byrne MP) put it in blunt terms. He leads Parliament's push for the Hillsborough law and knows what institutional cover up looks like from the inside. Ian Byrne said this scandal belongs on the same list as Hillsborough, the Post Office Horizon scandal and the infected blood scandal. He also pointed out something .... FCA is a private company limited by guarantee. It has immunity from civil liability and can resist scrutiny in the courts. A former FCA employee described its staff culture as the worst they had seen across a 40 year career. One case Byrne raised, Andrew Candy, was hit with a £70,000 break cost never disclosed to him, lost his business and his family home, then spent 17 years fighting for answers nobody gave him. The government's answer came from Economic Secretary to the Treasury Lucy Rigby (Lucy Rigby KC MP). She told Parliament the FCA is independent, so ministers should be careful about interfering with its judgment. AGAIN.. The regulator failed to regulate for over a decade, and the reason offered for not investigating that failure is respect for the regulator's independence. That is like refusing to review a fire brigade because fire brigades are traditionally left to fight fires, even the ones they started. Thousands of small businesses were quietly bled out through a product almost none of them understood and almost none of them were properly warned about. 2 whistleblowers gave a decade and a pension trying to fix it. Parliament asked for an inquiry. The Treasury offered a lecture on regulatory independence instead. Nobody has gone to prison... yet. Sources: stephen middleton, BankConfidential, James Hurley, The Times and Sunday Times, Hansard Westminster Hall debate 14 April 2026, John McDonnell, lan Byrne MP, Investment Fraud and Fairer Financial Services, Transparency Task Force, Financial Conduct Authority, Lucy Rigby KC MP, Money Marketing
1:49

THIS IS THE NEXT BIG UK SCANDAL You go to your bank for a loan. What you actually get is a bomb with a timer on it, and the bank keeps the detonator. That is the Hidden Credit Line scandal It has been running since the 2000s. Here is how it worked. Banks including NatWest (NatWest Group), Royal Bank of Scotland (Royal Bank) and Ulster Bank (Ulster Bank) sold business owners what looked like an ordinary loan. Attached to it was an interest rate swap, marketed as protection if rates went up. What it actually did was build a hidden credit line into the deal, extra exposure booked against the customer's own assets that they were never clearly told about. When rates fell after 2008, banks used that hidden exposure to call in debts, strip assets and push profitable businesses into insolvency. Two men refused to let this disappear. Steve Middleton (stephen middleton) and Mark Wright, a former RBS manager, built BankConfidential (BankConfidential) to collect the evidence the banks hoped would stay buried. Mark Wright funded years of the work with roughly £60,000 of his own pension. He also named the individual who taught bank trainees... ... how to forge customer signatures. Neither man made a penny from any of it. Both watched their careers end for telling the truth. In November 2022, Steve Middleton, Lord Prem Sikka (Prem Sikka) and derivatives expert Ian Tyler sat down with the Financial Conduct Authority (Financial Conduct Authority) and showed the whole thing in detail. The Times and Sunday Times journalist James Hurley (James Hurley) had already written four separate articles calling it financial and accounting fraud, including what he described as theft from Ulster Bank fixed rate loan customers. The FCA let NatWest mark its own homework, then concluded the fraud was not technically criminal fraud. A regulator investigating fraud and ruling that fraud is fine as long as nobody gets arrested for it. In November 2025, BankConfidential published their full report, modestly titled the largest fraud anywhere ever. Five months later, on 14 April 2026, it forced a Westminster Hall debate led by John McDonnell MP (John McDonnell), chair of the APPG on Investment Fraud and Fairer Financial Services (Investment Fraud and Fairer Financial Services). MPs read out the human cost. Catherine and Nigel Jarvis, told their losses were not foreseeable by a bank that had built those losses into the product from the start. Stephen and Gloria Lilley, personal guarantors on their own home, refused basic information about the size of the liability they were personally guaranteeing. MPs asked for one thing, a fully independent judge led statutory inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005. Before this request there had already been the Foskett panel, the Swift review, the Cranston review, the Tomlinson report, the Project Lord Turnbull report by Sally Masterton and a full parliamentary commission on banking standards. Six reviews, zero justice. This would have been the seventh. Ian Byrne MP (lan Byrne MP) put it in blunt terms. He leads Parliament's push for the Hillsborough law and knows what institutional cover up looks like from the inside. Ian Byrne said this scandal belongs on the same list as Hillsborough, the Post Office Horizon scandal and the infected blood scandal. He also pointed out something .... FCA is a private company limited by guarantee. It has immunity from civil liability and can resist scrutiny in the courts. A former FCA employee described its staff culture as the worst they had seen across a 40 year career. One case Byrne raised, Andrew Candy, was hit with a £70,000 break cost never disclosed to him, lost his business and his family home, then spent 17 years fighting for answers nobody gave him. The government's answer came from Economic Secretary to the Treasury Lucy Rigby (Lucy Rigby KC MP). She told Parliament the FCA is independent, so ministers should be careful about interfering with its judgment. AGAIN.. The regulator failed to regulate for over a decade, and the reason offered for not investigating that failure is respect for the regulator's independence. That is like refusing to review a fire brigade because fire brigades are traditionally left to fight fires, even the ones they started. Thousands of small businesses were quietly bled out through a product almost none of them understood and almost none of them were properly warned about. 2 whistleblowers gave a decade and a pension trying to fix it. Parliament asked for an inquiry. The Treasury offered a lecture on regulatory independence instead. Nobody has gone to prison... yet. Sources: stephen middleton, BankConfidential, James Hurley, The Times and Sunday Times, Hansard Westminster Hall debate 14 April 2026, John McDonnell, lan Byrne MP, Investment Fraud and Fairer Financial Services, Transparency Task Force, Financial Conduct Authority, Lucy Rigby KC MP, Money Marketing

Artur Nadolny

131,165 просмотров • 29 дней назад

This is the most important post I’ve made to date, by far . It’s an interview with journalist Whitney Webb explaining - Digital ID, where the idea came from, who are the stakeholders and beneficiaries of it, the immense power and control you will cede to Govt and corporations. I have spliced in NZ video to illustrates the points that Webb makes throughout the video. In it she explains how Digital ID is necessary for digital currency to be used, which in turn will create a river of wealth and control for corporations and global bodies. It explains how the public (including here in NZ) is being gaslit about the bill for restricting social media - this requires us all to be biometrically scanned and it will be linked to the new Whakatuturu or verify me digital ID. It features outtakes from select committee submissions from Mattr NZ a subsidiary of Spark who have designed the digital ID architecture, and has previously developed the Covid App plus worked with spy agencies in the US at the dept of Homeland & security. It also features footage of the Co -Chair of the Digital Trust Framework Anna Marie Cavanagh on a UN sustainable Goals discussion, along with Ardern stating the digital ID is built for interaction with Carbon Markets and with the UN SDG’s in mind. Larry Fink (Blackrock) and Jamie Dimon (JP MorganChase) discuss the future of finance and tokenising assets, including your house and even natural assets. Dimon has publicly said that banks should be able to seize public property in the name of climate change. The UN a will force us all to use carbon markets the take up so far has been woeful. Ever wonder why the UN has pushed for legal personhood for natural sites such as Mt Taranaki? It’s because they need to be loaded on the digital ledger. Ngati Wai activist Aperahama Edwards (best known for taking Davis Seymour’s mic away at Waitangi) has so far gathered $70m USD with the backing of King Charles & Richard Branson to make a blue carbon market from NZ’s EEZ and are developing a electronic ‘rāhui’ in the waters to ‘protect the whales’ and the whales will be given a digital ID. The project steered by an Ex IMF director will then ‘take control of the migratory sea channels’ and sell bonds in the ocean. News items covering this bizarre scheme is included. When they say Data is the new oil they were wrong. Data is much more valuable, when you have total tracking of everyone in society. If this all sounds far fetched. Watch the video and get back to me. For nearly two decades I worked internationally in funds management, including working on projects for the biggest Tech companies in the world. I was there when banking institutions pushed CDO’s sheer lunacy that nearly wrecked the financial system in 2008. saw ESG and DEI together with new technology like digital Currency take over the industry and the most preposterous ideas floated, believe me I am very aware of how big Investment banks operate. The UN who entrenched such great ideas such as Transgenderism, Climate change alarmism, mass immigration, internet censorship and globalised centralised control are at the bass line of digital ID and asset tokenisation. Those some progressive woke lunatics who locked us up for months in our houses have designed a new digital prison. Expect it to be insane. The Digital ID architecture is built and ready to go, they just need a mass onboarding process where they can pair your biometrics to your digital ID & digital wallet - enter Luxon’s social media ban. This is nearly an hour long I know, and it’s taken me hours to make in the hope it will inform as many people as possible . Please do yourself and your family a favour, watch and share it. — Rhys Williams.
56:37

This is the most important post I’ve made to date, by far . It’s an interview with journalist Whitney Webb explaining - Digital ID, where the idea came from, who are the stakeholders and beneficiaries of it, the immense power and control you will cede to Govt and corporations. I have spliced in NZ video to illustrates the points that Webb makes throughout the video. In it she explains how Digital ID is necessary for digital currency to be used, which in turn will create a river of wealth and control for corporations and global bodies. It explains how the public (including here in NZ) is being gaslit about the bill for restricting social media - this requires us all to be biometrically scanned and it will be linked to the new Whakatuturu or verify me digital ID. It features outtakes from select committee submissions from Mattr NZ a subsidiary of Spark who have designed the digital ID architecture, and has previously developed the Covid App plus worked with spy agencies in the US at the dept of Homeland & security. It also features footage of the Co -Chair of the Digital Trust Framework Anna Marie Cavanagh on a UN sustainable Goals discussion, along with Ardern stating the digital ID is built for interaction with Carbon Markets and with the UN SDG’s in mind. Larry Fink (Blackrock) and Jamie Dimon (JP MorganChase) discuss the future of finance and tokenising assets, including your house and even natural assets. Dimon has publicly said that banks should be able to seize public property in the name of climate change. The UN a will force us all to use carbon markets the take up so far has been woeful. Ever wonder why the UN has pushed for legal personhood for natural sites such as Mt Taranaki? It’s because they need to be loaded on the digital ledger. Ngati Wai activist Aperahama Edwards (best known for taking Davis Seymour’s mic away at Waitangi) has so far gathered $70m USD with the backing of King Charles & Richard Branson to make a blue carbon market from NZ’s EEZ and are developing a electronic ‘rāhui’ in the waters to ‘protect the whales’ and the whales will be given a digital ID. The project steered by an Ex IMF director will then ‘take control of the migratory sea channels’ and sell bonds in the ocean. News items covering this bizarre scheme is included. When they say Data is the new oil they were wrong. Data is much more valuable, when you have total tracking of everyone in society. If this all sounds far fetched. Watch the video and get back to me. For nearly two decades I worked internationally in funds management, including working on projects for the biggest Tech companies in the world. I was there when banking institutions pushed CDO’s sheer lunacy that nearly wrecked the financial system in 2008. saw ESG and DEI together with new technology like digital Currency take over the industry and the most preposterous ideas floated, believe me I am very aware of how big Investment banks operate. The UN who entrenched such great ideas such as Transgenderism, Climate change alarmism, mass immigration, internet censorship and globalised centralised control are at the bass line of digital ID and asset tokenisation. Those some progressive woke lunatics who locked us up for months in our houses have designed a new digital prison. Expect it to be insane. The Digital ID architecture is built and ready to go, they just need a mass onboarding process where they can pair your biometrics to your digital ID & digital wallet - enter Luxon’s social media ban. This is nearly an hour long I know, and it’s taken me hours to make in the hope it will inform as many people as possible . Please do yourself and your family a favour, watch and share it. — Rhys Williams.

Holyhekatuiteka

129,502 просмотров • 1 год назад

Our 3-Year Journey: Building the Future of Web3 Gaming What started in 2022 as a game studio has evolved into a multi-layer gaming ecosystem — with products, infrastructure, and a thriving community at its core. On June 27, 2025, we proudly completed our TGE — a major step forward on our journey. Thanks for being with us every step of the way 🫶 In the past 3 years, we’ve built so much together across every layer of the ecosystem. 🎮Product Layer We’re building high-quality, engaging games for a diverse player base — across Moonveil Prop, Forge, Mini, and Punch series. Titles like AstrArk, Puffy 2048, Puffy Miner, and Puffy Match are already live, while Bushwhack, Flaming Pets, and Starry Sort are set to launch soon. Our games have been met with incredible love and support from the community, since January 2025, over 2.03 million Unique Active Wallets have joined AstrArk's open beta — and the adventure is still going strong. 🌕Operation & Identity Layer In Season 1, we introduced the Loyalty Program, Moon Beam Points, and Badge System — building a new identity framework that rewards engagement, contribution, and ownership. Over 1 million global users have joined us. To support our global player base, we’ve set up localized community hubs in CIS, East Asia, South Asia, and Brazil, making sure our projects truly connect with local users. We’re proud of the vibrant, feedback-driven community we’ve built, and we’ll keep supporting, listening, and improving. ⚙️ Infra Layer As for infrastructure, we’ve made equally significant progress. By integrating multiple scaling solutions through AggLayer, Moonveil ensures efficiency, security, and scalability. Our Layer 2 Chain testnet went live in February 2025, marking a major milestone. We will keep building, and the Layer 2 Chain mainnet will be launching soon. In Q4 2024, Moonveil launched a successful node sale, selling over 31,000 nodes to 4,137 unique node operators. We’re fully committed to ensuring the stable operation of Muse Node. These nodes will further enhance overall network performance, delivering a reliable and high-speed environment specifically optimized for on-chain gaming. 🚀 MORE to Come $MORE TGE on June 27 was not the destination — it’s just the beginning. Season 2 is just around the corner, with richer ecosystem mechanics, bigger rewards, and more exciting games like Bushwhack and Starry Sort . We’re deeply grateful for the passion and support from our community. Looking ahead, we’re excited to keep growing and evolving — together creating a new era of gaming.
0:54

Our 3-Year Journey: Building the Future of Web3 Gaming What started in 2022 as a game studio has evolved into a multi-layer gaming ecosystem — with products, infrastructure, and a thriving community at its core. On June 27, 2025, we proudly completed our TGE — a major step forward on our journey. Thanks for being with us every step of the way 🫶 In the past 3 years, we’ve built so much together across every layer of the ecosystem. 🎮Product Layer We’re building high-quality, engaging games for a diverse player base — across Moonveil Prop, Forge, Mini, and Punch series. Titles like AstrArk, Puffy 2048, Puffy Miner, and Puffy Match are already live, while Bushwhack, Flaming Pets, and Starry Sort are set to launch soon. Our games have been met with incredible love and support from the community, since January 2025, over 2.03 million Unique Active Wallets have joined AstrArk's open beta — and the adventure is still going strong. 🌕Operation & Identity Layer In Season 1, we introduced the Loyalty Program, Moon Beam Points, and Badge System — building a new identity framework that rewards engagement, contribution, and ownership. Over 1 million global users have joined us. To support our global player base, we’ve set up localized community hubs in CIS, East Asia, South Asia, and Brazil, making sure our projects truly connect with local users. We’re proud of the vibrant, feedback-driven community we’ve built, and we’ll keep supporting, listening, and improving. ⚙️ Infra Layer As for infrastructure, we’ve made equally significant progress. By integrating multiple scaling solutions through AggLayer, Moonveil ensures efficiency, security, and scalability. Our Layer 2 Chain testnet went live in February 2025, marking a major milestone. We will keep building, and the Layer 2 Chain mainnet will be launching soon. In Q4 2024, Moonveil launched a successful node sale, selling over 31,000 nodes to 4,137 unique node operators. We’re fully committed to ensuring the stable operation of Muse Node. These nodes will further enhance overall network performance, delivering a reliable and high-speed environment specifically optimized for on-chain gaming. 🚀 MORE to Come $MORE TGE on June 27 was not the destination — it’s just the beginning. Season 2 is just around the corner, with richer ecosystem mechanics, bigger rewards, and more exciting games like Bushwhack and Starry Sort . We’re deeply grateful for the passion and support from our community. Looking ahead, we’re excited to keep growing and evolving — together creating a new era of gaming.

🌙Moonveil.gg

78,782 просмотров • 1 год назад