Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Think Big PAC — pro-AI, linked to OpenAI, Palantir & Andreessen Horowitz — is going on the air in #UT01 w/ a $450,000 ad buy supporting former Rep. Ben McAdams' comeback bid. McAdams faces several progressive Dem primary rivals, including state Sen. Nate Blouin. Ad here:

AndrewSolender's profile picture

Andrew Solender

67,133 subscribers

43,509 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика#UT01
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Horowitz Andreessen Academy raised $42M from investors including Adam D'Angelo, tobi lutke Lütke, Tony Xu (Tony Xu), Fidji Simo (Fidji Simo) & Shyam Sankar (Shyam Sankar). Why? No student is going to enroll in a school that might run out of runway in 18 months. “Instead of raising for 18 months, we raised for a few years. This was very intentional because there's a big difference between starting a school & starting an AI app, & one of the biggest differences is you need longevity.” “As a student, you have to know that this school isn't going to run out of money.” “One of the simple reasons for raising $42 million is to say, ‘Hey, we have enough money to operate. In fact, we have enough money, we think, to get to profitability on the school.’”
2:13

Horowitz Andreessen Academy raised $42M from investors including Adam D'Angelo, tobi lutke Lütke, Tony Xu (Tony Xu), Fidji Simo (Fidji Simo) & Shyam Sankar (Shyam Sankar). Why? No student is going to enroll in a school that might run out of runway in 18 months. “Instead of raising for 18 months, we raised for a few years. This was very intentional because there's a big difference between starting a school & starting an AI app, & one of the biggest differences is you need longevity.” “As a student, you have to know that this school isn't going to run out of money.” “One of the simple reasons for raising $42 million is to say, ‘Hey, we have enough money to operate. In fact, we have enough money, we think, to get to profitability on the school.’”

Molly O’Shea

44,178 просмотров • 6 дней назад

BREAKING: Inside a16z's American Dynamism Fund Why Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz, & David Ulevitch Launched American Dynamism David Ulevitch (David Ulevitch 🇺🇸), General Partner at a16z, who co-leads the firm’s AD practice w/ Katherine Boyle (Katherine Boyle) joins Sourcery to break down America’s comeback It's time to build. We discuss: - Story behind American Dynamism’s rise - Private capital boom behind national interest - JP Morgan’s $1.5T “Security & Resiliency” initiative - AI’s role across defense, logistics, & manufacturing - Why venture capital must “fund freedom like our lives depend on it.” Highlights: (00:00) David Ulevitch (01:54) The origin of American Dynamism (05:23) Why Marc Andreessen & Ben Horowitz backed the idea early (03:30) Partnering with Katherine Boyle, from rivals to co-leads (06:14) From meme to movement (07:00) Why venture returns exist in defense, energy, & infrastructure (07:11) The new supply-and-demand moment for American industry (11:00) Building a policy bridge between D.C. & Silicon Valley (15:29) Fixing defense procurement, the “bake-off” model (17:15) Private capital as America’s innovation engine (20:02) JP Morgan’s $1.5T commitment & what it signals (20:30) China, supply chains, & the race for energy independence (22:12) The new late-stage capital environment for defense tech (24:05) How AI is transforming defense, logistics, and public safety (27:42) Why this is a multi-generational mission
28:06

BREAKING: Inside a16z's American Dynamism Fund Why Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz, & David Ulevitch Launched American Dynamism David Ulevitch (David Ulevitch 🇺🇸), General Partner at a16z, who co-leads the firm’s AD practice w/ Katherine Boyle (Katherine Boyle) joins Sourcery to break down America’s comeback It's time to build. We discuss: - Story behind American Dynamism’s rise - Private capital boom behind national interest - JP Morgan’s $1.5T “Security & Resiliency” initiative - AI’s role across defense, logistics, & manufacturing - Why venture capital must “fund freedom like our lives depend on it.” Highlights: (00:00) David Ulevitch (01:54) The origin of American Dynamism (05:23) Why Marc Andreessen & Ben Horowitz backed the idea early (03:30) Partnering with Katherine Boyle, from rivals to co-leads (06:14) From meme to movement (07:00) Why venture returns exist in defense, energy, & infrastructure (07:11) The new supply-and-demand moment for American industry (11:00) Building a policy bridge between D.C. & Silicon Valley (15:29) Fixing defense procurement, the “bake-off” model (17:15) Private capital as America’s innovation engine (20:02) JP Morgan’s $1.5T commitment & what it signals (20:30) China, supply chains, & the race for energy independence (22:12) The new late-stage capital environment for defense tech (24:05) How AI is transforming defense, logistics, and public safety (27:42) Why this is a multi-generational mission

Molly O’Shea

100,891 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

a16z (a16z) is now in the school business. The Horowitz Andreessen Academy (Horowitz Andreessen Academy) launched with $42M, Marc Andreessen (Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸) and Erik Torenberg (Erik Torenberg) on the board, and OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, NVIDIA, Anduril, Coinbase, Palantir, Meta and Replit as founding partners. I walked with the Founder and CEO, Gagan Biyani (Gagan Biyani 🏛) to learn more about the vision and why he’s the best person to lead it. We talk about: - Starting a debate camp at 13 with 50% margins - Seven jobs, three years, rarely in class at UC Berkeley - Why most professors "don't care about teaching" - Leadership lessons learned at Udemy and Sprig - Why the best builders will pick a16z over MIT or Harvard - 50 founding students, tuition-free - The call from Andrew Chen (andrew chen) that started the Academy - Ten meetings with Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz - Why Erik Torenberg (Erik Torenberg) keeps telling him "I leave that to you" TIMESTAMPS (00:00) Trailer (01:01) Gagan Biyani, Founder & CEO, Horowitz Andreessen Academy (02:23) A one-year fellowship built around building, not class (03:55) The three skills that are AI proof (08:16) Grandparents from Rajasthan who never finished high school (09:31) Starting a debate camp at 13 with 50% margins (12:59) Why schools are afraid of student agency (18:33) Seven jobs, three years, and rarely going to class (18:46) Why most professors don't care about teaching (25:41) What Udemy and Maven taught him (33:32) Raising $60M at Sprig, shutting down, and getting backed again (38:16) Why raising VC at 18 is a ten-year commitment (39:21) The call from Andrew Chen that started the Academy (41:18) Why the best builders will pick a16z over MIT or Harvard (43:17) 50 founding students, tuition-free (45:46) Why a Harvard dropout means nothing to him (51:42) Outro Full episode:
51:57

a16z (a16z) is now in the school business. The Horowitz Andreessen Academy (Horowitz Andreessen Academy) launched with $42M, Marc Andreessen (Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸) and Erik Torenberg (Erik Torenberg) on the board, and OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, NVIDIA, Anduril, Coinbase, Palantir, Meta and Replit as founding partners. I walked with the Founder and CEO, Gagan Biyani (Gagan Biyani 🏛) to learn more about the vision and why he’s the best person to lead it. We talk about: - Starting a debate camp at 13 with 50% margins - Seven jobs, three years, rarely in class at UC Berkeley - Why most professors "don't care about teaching" - Leadership lessons learned at Udemy and Sprig - Why the best builders will pick a16z over MIT or Harvard - 50 founding students, tuition-free - The call from Andrew Chen (andrew chen) that started the Academy - Ten meetings with Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz - Why Erik Torenberg (Erik Torenberg) keeps telling him "I leave that to you" TIMESTAMPS (00:00) Trailer (01:01) Gagan Biyani, Founder & CEO, Horowitz Andreessen Academy (02:23) A one-year fellowship built around building, not class (03:55) The three skills that are AI proof (08:16) Grandparents from Rajasthan who never finished high school (09:31) Starting a debate camp at 13 with 50% margins (12:59) Why schools are afraid of student agency (18:33) Seven jobs, three years, and rarely going to class (18:46) Why most professors don't care about teaching (25:41) What Udemy and Maven taught him (33:32) Raising $60M at Sprig, shutting down, and getting backed again (38:16) Why raising VC at 18 is a ten-year commitment (39:21) The call from Andrew Chen that started the Academy (41:18) Why the best builders will pick a16z over MIT or Harvard (43:17) 50 founding students, tuition-free (45:46) Why a Harvard dropout means nothing to him (51:42) Outro Full episode:

luba yudasina

15,180 просмотров • 4 дней назад

Why are there so many pharma ads on TV? HINT: It’s not to sell drugs. A TV news president admitted to RFK Jr. that any host allowing him to speak negatively about Big Pharma on air would be FIRED because “this is where our advertisers are.” Jaws dropped when former pharma insider Calley Means told Tucker Carlson on his show, “The news ad spending from pharma is a public relations lobbying tactic, essentially to BUY OFF the news... The media plays referee because they're funded by so on all levels.” There are only two countries that allow pharma ads on TV: one is the United States, and the other is New Zealand. And those pharma ads make up a BIG chunk of money. RFK Jr. was told by a network executive that “during non-election years, during some months, up to 70% of his news division revenues are coming from pharma.” During the 1950s and 1960s, when evidence about the dangers of smoking began to emerge, news organizations hesitated to expose Big Tobacco because they depended on the industry for its ad revenue. Now, the same conflict exists today with the pharmaceutical industry and TV news. This is why the mainstream media is in full-blown PANIC over RFK Jr.'s HHS appointment. They know that once he gets in, he is going to END pharma ads on TV. And that's going to be a devastating blow to their wallets.
3:19

Why are there so many pharma ads on TV? HINT: It’s not to sell drugs. A TV news president admitted to RFK Jr. that any host allowing him to speak negatively about Big Pharma on air would be FIRED because “this is where our advertisers are.” Jaws dropped when former pharma insider Calley Means told Tucker Carlson on his show, “The news ad spending from pharma is a public relations lobbying tactic, essentially to BUY OFF the news... The media plays referee because they're funded by so on all levels.” There are only two countries that allow pharma ads on TV: one is the United States, and the other is New Zealand. And those pharma ads make up a BIG chunk of money. RFK Jr. was told by a network executive that “during non-election years, during some months, up to 70% of his news division revenues are coming from pharma.” During the 1950s and 1960s, when evidence about the dangers of smoking began to emerge, news organizations hesitated to expose Big Tobacco because they depended on the industry for its ad revenue. Now, the same conflict exists today with the pharmaceutical industry and TV news. This is why the mainstream media is in full-blown PANIC over RFK Jr.'s HHS appointment. They know that once he gets in, he is going to END pharma ads on TV. And that's going to be a devastating blow to their wallets.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

15,895,638 просмотров • 1 год назад

OpenAI and Palantir are so terrified of this guy, they're spending millions to destroy him. There's a Democrat running for Congress in New York's 12th District named Alex Bores. Never heard of him? Well that's the point. 3 year state assemblyman. 30 bills passed. Co-author of the RAISE Act, the first real AI safety law in any major state. Soft bill. Basic transparency. Safety plans. Incident reporting. And for that, the AI industry has declared WAR on him. A Super PAC called Leading the Future has already dumped $2.5 million into destroying his campaign. Funded by Joe Lonsdale (Palantir co-founder), Greg Brockman (OpenAI co-founder), and Andreessen Horowitz. They've said they may spend up to $10 million. For a single House seat. But the money isn't the crazy part... The crazy part is what they've said OUT LOUD about why: They're trying to make him SUFFER so publicly that every future politician who even THINKS about regulating AI runs the other way. Bores' exact words: "They want to beat up on me so bad that when the idea of regulating AI comes up in the future, politicians run the other way." This is literally political deterrence. Terrorize one guy so brutally that Congress learns the lesson: Touch AI, end your career. Now here's where it gets really insane: Their main attack line is that Bores worked at Palantir "building ICE tech." And who funds the attacks? Joe Lonsdale. Palantir co-founder. The man who profits from ICE contracts is spending millions to attack a candidate for… once working at Palantir. But Bores QUIT Palantir in 2019 because executives refused to put anti-deportation guardrails into their ICE contracts after Trump's first election. He pushed internally. They said no. He walked. So the billionaire who funds deportation tech is spending millions to smear a candidate for working on deportation tech that the candidate actually tried to stop. You cannot make this up. And the question everyone should ask is: Why THIS guy? Bores isn't a radical. He's not anti-AI. Not Bernie Sanders. He's a moderate Democrat with a CS degree who passed the softest possible AI bill. Which is EXACTLY why Palantir and OpenAI are terrified of him. Because he proved something dangerous: You can actually pass AI regulation. It's not impossible. You just need one competent legislator who understands the tech and refuses to back down. Multiply that by 50 states and AI companies lose control forever. So they're not just attacking Bores the candidate. They're attacking the PROOF that AI regulation is possible. And they're doing it while OpenAI quietly publishes policy documents that ADMIT most of Bores' proposed regulations are reasonable. Third-party audits? They agree. Red-teaming? They agree. Kid safety provisions? They agree. They don't disagree with the substance. They disagree with the TIMING. They want regulation to come AFTER they've bought enough political power to write it themselves. That's what $2.5 million to destroy one assemblyman actually buys. Not an election. But a warning to every politician watching: If a first-term legislator with a soft bill can get buried under $10 million of attack ads, imagine what we'll do to you if you try to pass a real one. This is how industries capture democracy. With FEAR. And it's working. Members of Congress are already telling Bores in private: "We're watching this race. We want to see if this is an issue you can win on, or if money just swamps everything." Which basically means: Tell us if we're allowed to legislate on this. The crypto industry ran this exact playbook in 2024 through Fairshake. Hundreds of millions spent. Anti-crypto candidates destroyed. Congress rewritten. Now AI is running it at 10x the scale. Leading the Future: $125M raised. AI companies: $300M+ committed to the 2026 midterms. More than crypto spent in the ENTIRE 2024 cycle. All on one principle: Don't debate your critics. Destroy them so publicly nobody else dares become one. Palantir isn't scared of losing a House seat. OpenAI isn't scared of one guy's bill. They're scared of PRECEDENT. Because if Bores wins, the lesson Congress learns is that you CAN take on AI and survive. And that's the one lesson the industry can never afford them to learn. What's your take on this?
2:45

OpenAI and Palantir are so terrified of this guy, they're spending millions to destroy him. There's a Democrat running for Congress in New York's 12th District named Alex Bores. Never heard of him? Well that's the point. 3 year state assemblyman. 30 bills passed. Co-author of the RAISE Act, the first real AI safety law in any major state. Soft bill. Basic transparency. Safety plans. Incident reporting. And for that, the AI industry has declared WAR on him. A Super PAC called Leading the Future has already dumped $2.5 million into destroying his campaign. Funded by Joe Lonsdale (Palantir co-founder), Greg Brockman (OpenAI co-founder), and Andreessen Horowitz. They've said they may spend up to $10 million. For a single House seat. But the money isn't the crazy part... The crazy part is what they've said OUT LOUD about why: They're trying to make him SUFFER so publicly that every future politician who even THINKS about regulating AI runs the other way. Bores' exact words: "They want to beat up on me so bad that when the idea of regulating AI comes up in the future, politicians run the other way." This is literally political deterrence. Terrorize one guy so brutally that Congress learns the lesson: Touch AI, end your career. Now here's where it gets really insane: Their main attack line is that Bores worked at Palantir "building ICE tech." And who funds the attacks? Joe Lonsdale. Palantir co-founder. The man who profits from ICE contracts is spending millions to attack a candidate for… once working at Palantir. But Bores QUIT Palantir in 2019 because executives refused to put anti-deportation guardrails into their ICE contracts after Trump's first election. He pushed internally. They said no. He walked. So the billionaire who funds deportation tech is spending millions to smear a candidate for working on deportation tech that the candidate actually tried to stop. You cannot make this up. And the question everyone should ask is: Why THIS guy? Bores isn't a radical. He's not anti-AI. Not Bernie Sanders. He's a moderate Democrat with a CS degree who passed the softest possible AI bill. Which is EXACTLY why Palantir and OpenAI are terrified of him. Because he proved something dangerous: You can actually pass AI regulation. It's not impossible. You just need one competent legislator who understands the tech and refuses to back down. Multiply that by 50 states and AI companies lose control forever. So they're not just attacking Bores the candidate. They're attacking the PROOF that AI regulation is possible. And they're doing it while OpenAI quietly publishes policy documents that ADMIT most of Bores' proposed regulations are reasonable. Third-party audits? They agree. Red-teaming? They agree. Kid safety provisions? They agree. They don't disagree with the substance. They disagree with the TIMING. They want regulation to come AFTER they've bought enough political power to write it themselves. That's what $2.5 million to destroy one assemblyman actually buys. Not an election. But a warning to every politician watching: If a first-term legislator with a soft bill can get buried under $10 million of attack ads, imagine what we'll do to you if you try to pass a real one. This is how industries capture democracy. With FEAR. And it's working. Members of Congress are already telling Bores in private: "We're watching this race. We want to see if this is an issue you can win on, or if money just swamps everything." Which basically means: Tell us if we're allowed to legislate on this. The crypto industry ran this exact playbook in 2024 through Fairshake. Hundreds of millions spent. Anti-crypto candidates destroyed. Congress rewritten. Now AI is running it at 10x the scale. Leading the Future: $125M raised. AI companies: $300M+ committed to the 2026 midterms. More than crypto spent in the ENTIRE 2024 cycle. All on one principle: Don't debate your critics. Destroy them so publicly nobody else dares become one. Palantir isn't scared of losing a House seat. OpenAI isn't scared of one guy's bill. They're scared of PRECEDENT. Because if Bores wins, the lesson Congress learns is that you CAN take on AI and survive. And that's the one lesson the industry can never afford them to learn. What's your take on this?

Ricardo

96,028 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

BREAKING: a16z Launches The Horowitz Andreessen Academy with $42M in Funding Yes, a school. The Academy is an unaccredited, residential alternative to a 4-year degree in San Francisco, led by Founder & CEO Gagan Biyani (Gagan Biyani 🏛) (Udemy, Maven). Marc Andreessen (Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸) & Erik Torenberg (Erik Torenberg) are on the board. Investors include Adam D'Angelo, Tobi Lütke, Tony Xu, Fidji Simo & Shyam Sankar. Applications open today for a Founding Class of roughly 50 students, starting Fall 2027. 1 year, no tuition, admitted on proof of work. Anthropic, Anduril, Coinbase, Meta, NVIDIA, OpenAI, Palantir, Replit & Stripe are Founding Partners, with 30+ hiring partners behind them. We cover: › The $42M raise and the runway behind it › Portfolios, interviews and IQ testing in admissions › 75% to 80% project time and weekly pod check-ins › Tuition, partnerships and equity as the 3 revenue lines › Why the Academy is telling fundable 17-year-olds to wait "The big difference between going to the academy and going to college is we are not gonna prioritize your grades. We're gonna prioritize proof of work." 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐌𝐏𝐒 (00:00) Gagan Biyani, Founder & CEO of Horowitz Andreessen Academy (01:01) Why this Academy is different from college (04:44) Started his first company at age 13 (08:30) Building a school for Silicon Valley (11:55) Raising $40M for a School (14:06) "You Did What?" - Proof of work over grades (19:08) Should young builders really start companies? (22:37) Why this is different from YC and fellowships (27:35) The Academy is for young builders (31:33) Why schools need to embrace AI (37:18) How AI is changing education (44:17) What an AI-native curriculum looks like (48:51) Why high-agency students struggle in college (53:12) Why the best builders zigzag (1:02:19) Why you should apply even if you don't get in (1:04:36) Building a supportive environment for young builders (1:08:54) What the Academy program looks like (1:10:44) Why the Academy is in San Francisco (1:11:19) The people who shaped Gagan (1:14:41) Favorite book!
1:18:49

BREAKING: a16z Launches The Horowitz Andreessen Academy with $42M in Funding Yes, a school. The Academy is an unaccredited, residential alternative to a 4-year degree in San Francisco, led by Founder & CEO Gagan Biyani (Gagan Biyani 🏛) (Udemy, Maven). Marc Andreessen (Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸) & Erik Torenberg (Erik Torenberg) are on the board. Investors include Adam D'Angelo, Tobi Lütke, Tony Xu, Fidji Simo & Shyam Sankar. Applications open today for a Founding Class of roughly 50 students, starting Fall 2027. 1 year, no tuition, admitted on proof of work. Anthropic, Anduril, Coinbase, Meta, NVIDIA, OpenAI, Palantir, Replit & Stripe are Founding Partners, with 30+ hiring partners behind them. We cover: › The $42M raise and the runway behind it › Portfolios, interviews and IQ testing in admissions › 75% to 80% project time and weekly pod check-ins › Tuition, partnerships and equity as the 3 revenue lines › Why the Academy is telling fundable 17-year-olds to wait "The big difference between going to the academy and going to college is we are not gonna prioritize your grades. We're gonna prioritize proof of work." 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐌𝐏𝐒 (00:00) Gagan Biyani, Founder & CEO of Horowitz Andreessen Academy (01:01) Why this Academy is different from college (04:44) Started his first company at age 13 (08:30) Building a school for Silicon Valley (11:55) Raising $40M for a School (14:06) "You Did What?" - Proof of work over grades (19:08) Should young builders really start companies? (22:37) Why this is different from YC and fellowships (27:35) The Academy is for young builders (31:33) Why schools need to embrace AI (37:18) How AI is changing education (44:17) What an AI-native curriculum looks like (48:51) Why high-agency students struggle in college (53:12) Why the best builders zigzag (1:02:19) Why you should apply even if you don't get in (1:04:36) Building a supportive environment for young builders (1:08:54) What the Academy program looks like (1:10:44) Why the Academy is in San Francisco (1:11:19) The people who shaped Gagan (1:14:41) Favorite book!

Molly O’Shea

417,663 просмотров • 6 дней назад

SCOOP: RINO Texas Senator John Cornyn Senator John Cornyn (who is trailing 20 points in the polls behind Texas AG Attorney General Ken Paxton) is debuting the ad below on Television tomorrow morning (July 16, 2025) in Texas. I can exclusively report that the ad has manipulated audio and video of President Trump’s voice from a February 11, 2019 Trump rally in Texas where he recognized Texas SENATORS (plural), but Cornyn manipulated the audio to cut off the S at the end of SENATORS in the 2019 Trump rally clip to make primary voters in Texas think President Donald J. Trump was only praising him in 2025. I exclusively obtained the ad before it airs on TV tomorrow. I merged the two videos into one so you can see the pro-Cornyn ad that will air in Texas first thing tomorrow morning, and then the comparison video so you can see how Cornyn and his campaign team manipulated the audio to deceive MAGA voters. He took out the mention of Ted Cruz and edited the audio to hide the mention of other Senators in a video clip from 6 YEARS AGO. Shame on Senator John Cornyn for manipulating President Trump’s voice from a February 11, 2019 rally to make it appear like President Donald J. Trump Trump is endorsing Team Cornyn’s 2026 Senate primary campaign. The reason why John Cornyn has to use a 6 year old clip is because Cornyn is a RINO, and there is no recent footage or audio of anyone in MAGA world, including President Trump, praising Cornyn over the last 6 years. Just a reminder that in May of 2023, Senator John Cornyn stated he believed Donald Trump's "time has passed him by" in terms of his viability as a presidential candidate. John Cornyn was one of the first Senators who said the GOP needs to move on from President Trump post J6, and he vilified Trump and his supporters over J6. What a loser! We are going to force John Cornyn to retire from the US Senate this year.
1:02

SCOOP: RINO Texas Senator John Cornyn Senator John Cornyn (who is trailing 20 points in the polls behind Texas AG Attorney General Ken Paxton) is debuting the ad below on Television tomorrow morning (July 16, 2025) in Texas. I can exclusively report that the ad has manipulated audio and video of President Trump’s voice from a February 11, 2019 Trump rally in Texas where he recognized Texas SENATORS (plural), but Cornyn manipulated the audio to cut off the S at the end of SENATORS in the 2019 Trump rally clip to make primary voters in Texas think President Donald J. Trump was only praising him in 2025. I exclusively obtained the ad before it airs on TV tomorrow. I merged the two videos into one so you can see the pro-Cornyn ad that will air in Texas first thing tomorrow morning, and then the comparison video so you can see how Cornyn and his campaign team manipulated the audio to deceive MAGA voters. He took out the mention of Ted Cruz and edited the audio to hide the mention of other Senators in a video clip from 6 YEARS AGO. Shame on Senator John Cornyn for manipulating President Trump’s voice from a February 11, 2019 rally to make it appear like President Donald J. Trump Trump is endorsing Team Cornyn’s 2026 Senate primary campaign. The reason why John Cornyn has to use a 6 year old clip is because Cornyn is a RINO, and there is no recent footage or audio of anyone in MAGA world, including President Trump, praising Cornyn over the last 6 years. Just a reminder that in May of 2023, Senator John Cornyn stated he believed Donald Trump's "time has passed him by" in terms of his viability as a presidential candidate. John Cornyn was one of the first Senators who said the GOP needs to move on from President Trump post J6, and he vilified Trump and his supporters over J6. What a loser! We are going to force John Cornyn to retire from the US Senate this year.

Laura Loomer

1,276,079 просмотров • 1 год назад

Gagan Biyani with Erik Torenberg and Ben Horowitz on HAA: The Horowitz Andreessen Academy HAA is a private, full-time, in-person school in San Francisco for young people coming out of high school. Its mission is to nurture the best young people in the world, and equip them with the tools to shape it. The Industrial Revolution rewrote how we train young people. It's time for a new model for the AI era. HAA is project-based – less lecture time, more time with tools and AI, structured social life, co-ops/internships, with students embedded alongside working adults. Founding Partners include Anduril, Anthropic, Coinbase, Google, Meta, NVIDIA, OpenAI, Palantir, Replit, and Stripe. It's the best time in history to be 18. The vision is grads with careers they love or their own companies founded, and hopefully other schools copying the model down the road. 0:55 Why a16z is backing a school 4:40 Why other college alternatives failed 6:55 AI is this era's Industrial Revolution 9:35 The model: live in SF, intern at top startups 12:10 Ben: the best time in history to be 18 15:25 No big idea at 18? Join someone who has one 17:40 People skills come from reps, not lectures 23:15 Why it has to be San Francisco 26:45 Why it's a separate, for-profit company 31:00 Every curiosity becomes a project 33:30 Main character or NPC? 35:15 You can't learn to be a CEO from a book 37:30 Picking a problem, and failing the right way 40:30 What success looks like in five years YouTube: Gagan Biryani 🏛 benahorowitz.eth Erik Torenberg
42:41

Gagan Biyani with Erik Torenberg and Ben Horowitz on HAA: The Horowitz Andreessen Academy HAA is a private, full-time, in-person school in San Francisco for young people coming out of high school. Its mission is to nurture the best young people in the world, and equip them with the tools to shape it. The Industrial Revolution rewrote how we train young people. It's time for a new model for the AI era. HAA is project-based – less lecture time, more time with tools and AI, structured social life, co-ops/internships, with students embedded alongside working adults. Founding Partners include Anduril, Anthropic, Coinbase, Google, Meta, NVIDIA, OpenAI, Palantir, Replit, and Stripe. It's the best time in history to be 18. The vision is grads with careers they love or their own companies founded, and hopefully other schools copying the model down the road. 0:55 Why a16z is backing a school 4:40 Why other college alternatives failed 6:55 AI is this era's Industrial Revolution 9:35 The model: live in SF, intern at top startups 12:10 Ben: the best time in history to be 18 15:25 No big idea at 18? Join someone who has one 17:40 People skills come from reps, not lectures 23:15 Why it has to be San Francisco 26:45 Why it's a separate, for-profit company 31:00 Every curiosity becomes a project 33:30 Main character or NPC? 35:15 You can't learn to be a CEO from a book 37:30 Picking a problem, and failing the right way 40:30 What success looks like in five years YouTube: Gagan Biryani 🏛 benahorowitz.eth Erik Torenberg

a16z

226,968 просмотров • 6 дней назад

Thoughts on OpenAI growth... Comparing Anthropic and OpenAI is the natural thing to do, but we also have to remember - these are two businesses chasing two DIFFERENT monetization models. I've said this before, in fact I wrote about it 2 months ago when OpenAI announced the development of their DSP (ad platform). OpenAI is chasing Google's architecture. Anthropic is chasing Microsoft's architecture. OpenAI is intentionally pursuing a monetization strategy that focuses on the consumer first. Whereas Anthropic is intentionally pursuing a strategy to focus on the enterprise first. This is a very similar dichotomy to that of $GOOGL v. $MSFT. Let's start off the with a quick comparison. Q2 Revenue: - OpenAI: $6.7 billion (+18% QoQ) - Anthropic: $11.6 billion (+100% QoQ) Dramatic different, yes - but are we surprised? I'm personally not. It's been public information for quite some time that Anthropic has found tremendous enterprise success - with ClaudeCode used by 8 of the 10 largest corporations and 70% of the F100 companies... Yes, I expect the revenue ramp for this business to be dramatic! On the flip side, OpenAI has Codex. However, this is not their core strategy for monetization. They've chosen the path of programatic advertising - the same path $GOOGL walked in 2000. $GOOGL's growth did NOT explode the moment they launched their ad-platform - let's look at the numbers: - 2000: $70M (Launch) - 2001: $86M - 2002: $440M (PPC launch) - 2003: $1.5B - 2005: $6.1B (AdSense launch) - 2007: $16.4B Albeit, this was earlier days for online advertising. The point being, this is not a switch you turn on and expect revenue to flow through as if were a hydro-electric dam lifting it's gates for the first time. No, this is a new channel for CMOs, SMBs and agencies to activate on - they have to learn it - understand what content and strategies best work - heck, OpenAI has to validate there are no placement or programmatic issues while expanding services into more geographical regions. That being said, here's the current milestones of OpenAI's ad platform development... - Feb 9 '26 (Pilot launch US) - Mar 26 '26 (Success - $100M ARR hit) - Apr '26 (CPC launched) - Aug '26 (Confirmed Intl expansion) - Present (Ads hit ~$1B ARR) To put that into perspective, they're targeting $2.5B in ad revenue for the full year. Sure, a faction of the total projected $62B in 2026 revenue, but this is just the beginning. Looking at their long-term ad projections: - 2026: $2.5B - 2027: $11B - 2028: $25B - 2029: $53B - 2030: $100B This long term business model is advertising - through and through. In my opinion, the enterprise exposure and seat subscriptions will be supplemental to an advertising core - much like a $GOOGL. Remember, OpenAI still dominates among consumers, people who aren't using LLMs for coding or development - but rather a search supplement. This is a context rich ecosystem, perfect for advertising. Because more context equals more clarity of intent. Talking big picture... If we see a token crunch, and pricing per token plummets, in this hypothetical world OpenAI is likely to be more "protected" vs. the likes of an Anthropic. Enterprise billing and cost per token are virtually linked to the hip. If Anthropic is unable to charge a premium due to alternative open-source models and/or a change in the demand ecosystem - this could be problematic to their revenue model. On the flip side - OpenAI with an ads-first monetization strategy, may be spared in this hypothetical scenario. A growing user base with compounding consumer context/profiles becomes more and more valuable over time. The more features, tools and value they are able to provide to the consumer, the more integrated the consumer becomes. The result is more consumer data - and we all know, a real time consumer data-rich ecosystem can create MASSIVE adverting demand (look at $META / $GOOGL) That being said... I'm not making an argument for OpenAI's alleged valuation - it will be VERY difficult to justify - especially in it's current state. My point is simply... I think it is very possible for OpenAI to have a much less volatile long-term revenue strategy through ad monetization because of their position of consumer dominance. Therefore, the direct success of this ads platform is a CRITICAL gate for the company to IPO. As a $ZETA investor noting the relationship these two companies have - I think the prospect of a context rich environment, therefore high intent prospects, with the deterministic profiled IDs - is something advertisers would love to gain access to... heck I think it excites them. For $ZETA shareholders, this next note is important... OpenAI can provide deterministic verification of a person and the intent from that person when they're logged in. If a user is NOT logged in - this is where $ZETA is critical. OpenAI can use $ZETA's deterministic data graph to validate who this person is, and close the loop. For an enterprise - this is required when driving marketing budgets against a return target (ROAS).
0:58

Thoughts on OpenAI growth... Comparing Anthropic and OpenAI is the natural thing to do, but we also have to remember - these are two businesses chasing two DIFFERENT monetization models. I've said this before, in fact I wrote about it 2 months ago when OpenAI announced the development of their DSP (ad platform). OpenAI is chasing Google's architecture. Anthropic is chasing Microsoft's architecture. OpenAI is intentionally pursuing a monetization strategy that focuses on the consumer first. Whereas Anthropic is intentionally pursuing a strategy to focus on the enterprise first. This is a very similar dichotomy to that of $GOOGL v. $MSFT. Let's start off the with a quick comparison. Q2 Revenue: - OpenAI: $6.7 billion (+18% QoQ) - Anthropic: $11.6 billion (+100% QoQ) Dramatic different, yes - but are we surprised? I'm personally not. It's been public information for quite some time that Anthropic has found tremendous enterprise success - with ClaudeCode used by 8 of the 10 largest corporations and 70% of the F100 companies... Yes, I expect the revenue ramp for this business to be dramatic! On the flip side, OpenAI has Codex. However, this is not their core strategy for monetization. They've chosen the path of programatic advertising - the same path $GOOGL walked in 2000. $GOOGL's growth did NOT explode the moment they launched their ad-platform - let's look at the numbers: - 2000: $70M (Launch) - 2001: $86M - 2002: $440M (PPC launch) - 2003: $1.5B - 2005: $6.1B (AdSense launch) - 2007: $16.4B Albeit, this was earlier days for online advertising. The point being, this is not a switch you turn on and expect revenue to flow through as if were a hydro-electric dam lifting it's gates for the first time. No, this is a new channel for CMOs, SMBs and agencies to activate on - they have to learn it - understand what content and strategies best work - heck, OpenAI has to validate there are no placement or programmatic issues while expanding services into more geographical regions. That being said, here's the current milestones of OpenAI's ad platform development... - Feb 9 '26 (Pilot launch US) - Mar 26 '26 (Success - $100M ARR hit) - Apr '26 (CPC launched) - Aug '26 (Confirmed Intl expansion) - Present (Ads hit ~$1B ARR) To put that into perspective, they're targeting $2.5B in ad revenue for the full year. Sure, a faction of the total projected $62B in 2026 revenue, but this is just the beginning. Looking at their long-term ad projections: - 2026: $2.5B - 2027: $11B - 2028: $25B - 2029: $53B - 2030: $100B This long term business model is advertising - through and through. In my opinion, the enterprise exposure and seat subscriptions will be supplemental to an advertising core - much like a $GOOGL. Remember, OpenAI still dominates among consumers, people who aren't using LLMs for coding or development - but rather a search supplement. This is a context rich ecosystem, perfect for advertising. Because more context equals more clarity of intent. Talking big picture... If we see a token crunch, and pricing per token plummets, in this hypothetical world OpenAI is likely to be more "protected" vs. the likes of an Anthropic. Enterprise billing and cost per token are virtually linked to the hip. If Anthropic is unable to charge a premium due to alternative open-source models and/or a change in the demand ecosystem - this could be problematic to their revenue model. On the flip side - OpenAI with an ads-first monetization strategy, may be spared in this hypothetical scenario. A growing user base with compounding consumer context/profiles becomes more and more valuable over time. The more features, tools and value they are able to provide to the consumer, the more integrated the consumer becomes. The result is more consumer data - and we all know, a real time consumer data-rich ecosystem can create MASSIVE adverting demand (look at $META / $GOOGL) That being said... I'm not making an argument for OpenAI's alleged valuation - it will be VERY difficult to justify - especially in it's current state. My point is simply... I think it is very possible for OpenAI to have a much less volatile long-term revenue strategy through ad monetization because of their position of consumer dominance. Therefore, the direct success of this ads platform is a CRITICAL gate for the company to IPO. As a $ZETA investor noting the relationship these two companies have - I think the prospect of a context rich environment, therefore high intent prospects, with the deterministic profiled IDs - is something advertisers would love to gain access to... heck I think it excites them. For $ZETA shareholders, this next note is important... OpenAI can provide deterministic verification of a person and the intent from that person when they're logged in. If a user is NOT logged in - this is where $ZETA is critical. OpenAI can use $ZETA's deterministic data graph to validate who this person is, and close the loop. For an enterprise - this is required when driving marketing budgets against a return target (ROAS).

Wealthmatica

14,671 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

OpenAI just created a $10 billion company whose ONLY job is forcing businesses to use AI. And they're literally guaranteeing investors a 17.5% annual return to make it happen. It's called "The Deployment Company." OpenAI finalized it yesterday with 19 investors including TPG, SoftBank, Bain Capital, Brookfield, and Advent International. Here's the structure: OpenAI puts in $1.5 billion. The private equity firms put in $4 billion. In exchange, those PE firms open up their 2,000+ portfolio companies as a CAPTIVE customer base for OpenAI's products. OpenAI then embeds teams of engineers directly inside those companies, Palantir-style, to integrate their tools into daily operations. And here's the big red flag in all of this: OpenAI is GUARANTEEING those PE firms a 17.5% annual return over five years. That means even if the companies in the portfolio don't want AI, don't need AI, or get zero value from AI, OpenAI is still on the hook to pay those returns. Think about what that means for a second. OpenAI is so desperate for enterprise adoption that they're paying Wall Street to force their product into thousands of businesses. They've essentially turned private equity firms into a distribution cartel with a guaranteed commission. This has NEVER been done before in enterprise software. No software company in history has guaranteed above-market returns to financial sponsors just to get their product installed. And it gets crazier: Within MINUTES of OpenAI's announcement, Anthropic announced their own version. A $1.5 billion joint venture with Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, and Hellman & Friedman. Same playbook. Two companies worth a combined $1+ TRILLION in private valuation both concluded on the same day that organic demand for their products is not growing fast enough. If enterprises were lining up to buy AI on their own, you wouldn't need to bribe private equity firms with guaranteed returns to shove it into their portfolios. You would just sell it normally like every other software company in history. But they can't. Because the gap between what AI companies PROMISE and what enterprises actually experience is still enormous. OpenAI's COO Brad Lightcap just moved into a new role specifically to lead this push. They've also signed "Frontier Alliances" with major consulting firms to embed AI through professional services channels. Every move they're making screams the same thing: We have a demand problem. And this is all happening right before OpenAI tries to IPO at $850 billion. If they can show Wall Street that 2,000+ companies are "using OpenAI products" through this PE distribution channel, it inflates their enterprise metrics right before the roadshow. Doesn't matter if those companies actually need it or if it creates real value. What matters is the number on the S-1. This is the AI playbook entering its most dangerous phase. The tech is real but the business model is being held together by financial engineering, guaranteed returns, and captive distribution deals that look more like a pharmaceutical company paying doctors to prescribe their drug than a software company earning customers on merit. And both OpenAI and Anthropic admitted it on the same day.
0:54

OpenAI just created a $10 billion company whose ONLY job is forcing businesses to use AI. And they're literally guaranteeing investors a 17.5% annual return to make it happen. It's called "The Deployment Company." OpenAI finalized it yesterday with 19 investors including TPG, SoftBank, Bain Capital, Brookfield, and Advent International. Here's the structure: OpenAI puts in $1.5 billion. The private equity firms put in $4 billion. In exchange, those PE firms open up their 2,000+ portfolio companies as a CAPTIVE customer base for OpenAI's products. OpenAI then embeds teams of engineers directly inside those companies, Palantir-style, to integrate their tools into daily operations. And here's the big red flag in all of this: OpenAI is GUARANTEEING those PE firms a 17.5% annual return over five years. That means even if the companies in the portfolio don't want AI, don't need AI, or get zero value from AI, OpenAI is still on the hook to pay those returns. Think about what that means for a second. OpenAI is so desperate for enterprise adoption that they're paying Wall Street to force their product into thousands of businesses. They've essentially turned private equity firms into a distribution cartel with a guaranteed commission. This has NEVER been done before in enterprise software. No software company in history has guaranteed above-market returns to financial sponsors just to get their product installed. And it gets crazier: Within MINUTES of OpenAI's announcement, Anthropic announced their own version. A $1.5 billion joint venture with Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, and Hellman & Friedman. Same playbook. Two companies worth a combined $1+ TRILLION in private valuation both concluded on the same day that organic demand for their products is not growing fast enough. If enterprises were lining up to buy AI on their own, you wouldn't need to bribe private equity firms with guaranteed returns to shove it into their portfolios. You would just sell it normally like every other software company in history. But they can't. Because the gap between what AI companies PROMISE and what enterprises actually experience is still enormous. OpenAI's COO Brad Lightcap just moved into a new role specifically to lead this push. They've also signed "Frontier Alliances" with major consulting firms to embed AI through professional services channels. Every move they're making screams the same thing: We have a demand problem. And this is all happening right before OpenAI tries to IPO at $850 billion. If they can show Wall Street that 2,000+ companies are "using OpenAI products" through this PE distribution channel, it inflates their enterprise metrics right before the roadshow. Doesn't matter if those companies actually need it or if it creates real value. What matters is the number on the S-1. This is the AI playbook entering its most dangerous phase. The tech is real but the business model is being held together by financial engineering, guaranteed returns, and captive distribution deals that look more like a pharmaceutical company paying doctors to prescribe their drug than a software company earning customers on merit. And both OpenAI and Anthropic admitted it on the same day.

Ricardo

52,766 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

BREAKING: Google Growth Strategist Exposes Google’s Search Engine Manipulation for Kamala Harris Campaign, Revenue-Driven Political Bias "Google was essentially promoting through its ads rhetoric that was very pro-Kamala,” admits Dakota Leazer (Dakota Leazer), a Growth Strategist at Google, during an undercover date with an OMG American Swiper journalist. Leazer reveals that Google has been actively coordinating with the Kamala Harris campaign, manipulating its search engine advertisements to favor her in the 2024 election. He explains, “It seemed to link out to legitimate news publication sites. So, it seemed like it was an ad from PBS, but it was really an ad for the Kamala campaign,” making users believe they were reading unbiased reports from reputable sources. Leazer also confesses that Google’s primary objective is to generate ad revenue through fear-based content, explaining, “I think whatever demographic is most fearful is going to be most profitable.” According to Leazer, the left currently represents the most fearful demographic, which is why Google has been pushing pro-Kamala narratives for profit, explaining “I think right now the left is more fearful than the right is.” He further states, “It's all about the share of the stock price,” revealing that Google’s liberal bias is not just political, but tied to financial gain. He adds, “I think Google has a belief that one side will allow them to make more money,” revealing Google’s profit motives through driving political manipulation. Leazer’s admission mirrors past media motives, including CNN Technical Director Charlie Chester’s claim that “fear sells,” reinforcing the role of big tech and media in shaping public perception through fear and bias. Kamala Harris Vice President JD Vance @KamalaHQ Team Trump (Text TRUMP to 88022) Trump War Room
9:46

BREAKING: Google Growth Strategist Exposes Google’s Search Engine Manipulation for Kamala Harris Campaign, Revenue-Driven Political Bias "Google was essentially promoting through its ads rhetoric that was very pro-Kamala,” admits Dakota Leazer (Dakota Leazer), a Growth Strategist at Google, during an undercover date with an OMG American Swiper journalist. Leazer reveals that Google has been actively coordinating with the Kamala Harris campaign, manipulating its search engine advertisements to favor her in the 2024 election. He explains, “It seemed to link out to legitimate news publication sites. So, it seemed like it was an ad from PBS, but it was really an ad for the Kamala campaign,” making users believe they were reading unbiased reports from reputable sources. Leazer also confesses that Google’s primary objective is to generate ad revenue through fear-based content, explaining, “I think whatever demographic is most fearful is going to be most profitable.” According to Leazer, the left currently represents the most fearful demographic, which is why Google has been pushing pro-Kamala narratives for profit, explaining “I think right now the left is more fearful than the right is.” He further states, “It's all about the share of the stock price,” revealing that Google’s liberal bias is not just political, but tied to financial gain. He adds, “I think Google has a belief that one side will allow them to make more money,” revealing Google’s profit motives through driving political manipulation. Leazer’s admission mirrors past media motives, including CNN Technical Director Charlie Chester’s claim that “fear sells,” reinforcing the role of big tech and media in shaping public perception through fear and bias. Kamala Harris Vice President JD Vance @KamalaHQ Team Trump (Text TRUMP to 88022) Trump War Room

James O'Keefe

3,911,101 просмотров • 2 лет назад

OpenAI just paid hundreds of millions of dollars for a podcast with 70,000 viewers. At first glance, it makes zero sense. Until you realize what they're actually buying: Control over what gets said about AI before regulators figure out what to regulate. This is literally one of the most aggressive power grabs in tech history... OpenAI just acquired TBPN, the Silicon Valley talk show hosted by John Coogan and Jordi Hays. The show has a tiny audience - 70,000 viewers per episode. But it's the most influential room in tech. It's where Zuckerberg, Satya Nadella, Marc Benioff, and Altman himself go to "chop it up" with friendly hosts who treat executive moves like sports trades. The New York Times called it "Silicon Valley's newest obsession." OpenAI didn't buy it for the revenue. They bought it to control the narrative. And then they put it under Chris Lehane. Lehane isn't a media executive. He's a political assassin. He coined the phrase "vast right-wing conspiracy" to deflect press scrutiny of the Clinton White House. He ran Fairshake, the crypto super PAC that spent hundreds of millions in 2024 to destroy anti-crypto candidates and rewrote the composition of Congress. He joined OpenAI in 2024 and has been whispering in Trump's ear ever since, pushing policies to BLOCK states from regulating AI and ease environmental rules slowing data center construction. That's the man now running OpenAI's new media company. They're promising "editorial independence." But do you think TBPN is going to run a hard-hitting investigation into OpenAI's circular financing? Or the Amazon AWS deal that blew up Microsoft's partnership? Or the $35 billion Amazon payment contingent on OpenAI achieving AGI? Of course not. That's not the point. The point is CONTROL of the room where the conversation happens. Now zoom out: Same week, Anthropic filed paperwork to form AnthroPAC while fighting a lawsuit against the Pentagon after being labeled a "supply chain risk." AI companies have now committed over $300 MILLION to the 2026 midterms. That's more than the entire crypto industry spent in 2024. Leading the Future, backed by Greg Brockman and Andreessen Horowitz: $125M raised. Anthropic: $20M to Public First Action. OpenAI: owns a media company AND has Lehane coordinating with the White House. This isn't about AI safety. It isn't about better products. It isn't about winning benchmarks... It's about who controls the narrative BEFORE the regulation gets written. Every tech mogul is now building their own "propaganda stack." Bezos bought The Washington Post. Benioff bought Time. Patrick Soon-Shiong bought the LA Times. Laurene Powell Jobs took The Atlantic. Elon took Twitter. Now it's AI's turn. But here's the thing: When you combine $300M in political donations, friendly podcasts owned by the companies being discussed, and operatives whispering in a President's ear who ALREADY signed an executive order blocking state AI regulation... You don't have a tech industry anymore. You have a political machine with AI products attached. OpenAI isn't worth $852 billion because of GPT-5.4. It's worth $852 billion because they're buying the referees before the game even starts. The next months aren't going to be about which model is smarter. They're going to be about which AI company captured more politicians, more media outlets, and more of the regulatory apparatus before the public figured out what was happening. And by the time you realize the game is rigged, the rules will already be written.
1:19

OpenAI just paid hundreds of millions of dollars for a podcast with 70,000 viewers. At first glance, it makes zero sense. Until you realize what they're actually buying: Control over what gets said about AI before regulators figure out what to regulate. This is literally one of the most aggressive power grabs in tech history... OpenAI just acquired TBPN, the Silicon Valley talk show hosted by John Coogan and Jordi Hays. The show has a tiny audience - 70,000 viewers per episode. But it's the most influential room in tech. It's where Zuckerberg, Satya Nadella, Marc Benioff, and Altman himself go to "chop it up" with friendly hosts who treat executive moves like sports trades. The New York Times called it "Silicon Valley's newest obsession." OpenAI didn't buy it for the revenue. They bought it to control the narrative. And then they put it under Chris Lehane. Lehane isn't a media executive. He's a political assassin. He coined the phrase "vast right-wing conspiracy" to deflect press scrutiny of the Clinton White House. He ran Fairshake, the crypto super PAC that spent hundreds of millions in 2024 to destroy anti-crypto candidates and rewrote the composition of Congress. He joined OpenAI in 2024 and has been whispering in Trump's ear ever since, pushing policies to BLOCK states from regulating AI and ease environmental rules slowing data center construction. That's the man now running OpenAI's new media company. They're promising "editorial independence." But do you think TBPN is going to run a hard-hitting investigation into OpenAI's circular financing? Or the Amazon AWS deal that blew up Microsoft's partnership? Or the $35 billion Amazon payment contingent on OpenAI achieving AGI? Of course not. That's not the point. The point is CONTROL of the room where the conversation happens. Now zoom out: Same week, Anthropic filed paperwork to form AnthroPAC while fighting a lawsuit against the Pentagon after being labeled a "supply chain risk." AI companies have now committed over $300 MILLION to the 2026 midterms. That's more than the entire crypto industry spent in 2024. Leading the Future, backed by Greg Brockman and Andreessen Horowitz: $125M raised. Anthropic: $20M to Public First Action. OpenAI: owns a media company AND has Lehane coordinating with the White House. This isn't about AI safety. It isn't about better products. It isn't about winning benchmarks... It's about who controls the narrative BEFORE the regulation gets written. Every tech mogul is now building their own "propaganda stack." Bezos bought The Washington Post. Benioff bought Time. Patrick Soon-Shiong bought the LA Times. Laurene Powell Jobs took The Atlantic. Elon took Twitter. Now it's AI's turn. But here's the thing: When you combine $300M in political donations, friendly podcasts owned by the companies being discussed, and operatives whispering in a President's ear who ALREADY signed an executive order blocking state AI regulation... You don't have a tech industry anymore. You have a political machine with AI products attached. OpenAI isn't worth $852 billion because of GPT-5.4. It's worth $852 billion because they're buying the referees before the game even starts. The next months aren't going to be about which model is smarter. They're going to be about which AI company captured more politicians, more media outlets, and more of the regulatory apparatus before the public figured out what was happening. And by the time you realize the game is rigged, the rules will already be written.

Ricardo

25,229 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

David Sacks: “FDA for AI” is fake news, but here’s why it’s making headlines @jason: “ Who's leading Trump down the path of regulation and creating this AI FDA?” David Sacks: “I think there's several things going on here. The first one is, there's a lot of fake news. This whole idea of an FDA for AI, I don't think any senior official supports it. Certainly, I don't think that's the way the president thinks about these issues. He's the most pro-innovation president we've ever had. And the White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, just put out a statement last night that I think pretty much shoots this down. Second, there's another thing going on, which is a straw manning of what the Trump administration did on AI in its first year. In the same way that they want to spin this FDA for AI, they're also trying to spin what we did as this completely laissez-faire attitude, where there'd be no regulations whatsoever, nor guardrails. It's a way of criticizing what we did. They're trying to portray it as unsafe. In fact, if you look, on March 20th, the White House released a national AI regulatory framework in which we put out a four-page bulleted list of legislation that we would support. So we have not been against every conceivable regulation or every conceivable law, we just believe that there should be specific solutions to specific problems, as opposed to a giant power grab by Washington that would squash innovation. Point number three is, there is a legitimate thing happening here with, let's call it Mythos or cyber. Within 3-6 months, all the major frontier labs, including Chinese models, will have cyber capabilities. In response to that, we do need there to be a hardening of systems, and we do need there to be a scanning of codebases to find these vulnerabilities and patch them before the hackers do it. Because the hackers will have these capabilities in a matter of months. That's a certainty. So we do need a response to that. Now, my view on what should that response be, first of all, we should want the government and the private sector to work cooperatively, and I think they are. What we should be doing, I think, is getting these tools, Mythos, and then the OpenAI model, and others like it, in the hands of our cybersecurity industry. And by the way, not just the public companies like Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike, although certainly they're two of the most noteworthy, but there's also some incredibly strong startups on the way up. We need to get these tools into their hands as quickly as possible because they're a force multiplier for all the companies out there that aren't that good at cybersecurity, they can use these companies as vendors. And just one last point on this whole thing is, both Anthropic and OpenAI acted responsibly here. No one was trying to release these super powerful models. So in a way, all the people who are saying that we need pre-release approvals for models, they're trying to solve a problem that didn't exist. Yes, we do have this cyber issue, but that is a problem that we will solve over the next six months. What they're trying to do is use that issue to try and create a permanent new infrastructure in Washington. The classic 'never let a crisis go to waste' strategy.”
2:47

David Sacks: “FDA for AI” is fake news, but here’s why it’s making headlines @jason: “ Who's leading Trump down the path of regulation and creating this AI FDA?” David Sacks: “I think there's several things going on here. The first one is, there's a lot of fake news. This whole idea of an FDA for AI, I don't think any senior official supports it. Certainly, I don't think that's the way the president thinks about these issues. He's the most pro-innovation president we've ever had. And the White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, just put out a statement last night that I think pretty much shoots this down. Second, there's another thing going on, which is a straw manning of what the Trump administration did on AI in its first year. In the same way that they want to spin this FDA for AI, they're also trying to spin what we did as this completely laissez-faire attitude, where there'd be no regulations whatsoever, nor guardrails. It's a way of criticizing what we did. They're trying to portray it as unsafe. In fact, if you look, on March 20th, the White House released a national AI regulatory framework in which we put out a four-page bulleted list of legislation that we would support. So we have not been against every conceivable regulation or every conceivable law, we just believe that there should be specific solutions to specific problems, as opposed to a giant power grab by Washington that would squash innovation. Point number three is, there is a legitimate thing happening here with, let's call it Mythos or cyber. Within 3-6 months, all the major frontier labs, including Chinese models, will have cyber capabilities. In response to that, we do need there to be a hardening of systems, and we do need there to be a scanning of codebases to find these vulnerabilities and patch them before the hackers do it. Because the hackers will have these capabilities in a matter of months. That's a certainty. So we do need a response to that. Now, my view on what should that response be, first of all, we should want the government and the private sector to work cooperatively, and I think they are. What we should be doing, I think, is getting these tools, Mythos, and then the OpenAI model, and others like it, in the hands of our cybersecurity industry. And by the way, not just the public companies like Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike, although certainly they're two of the most noteworthy, but there's also some incredibly strong startups on the way up. We need to get these tools into their hands as quickly as possible because they're a force multiplier for all the companies out there that aren't that good at cybersecurity, they can use these companies as vendors. And just one last point on this whole thing is, both Anthropic and OpenAI acted responsibly here. No one was trying to release these super powerful models. So in a way, all the people who are saying that we need pre-release approvals for models, they're trying to solve a problem that didn't exist. Yes, we do have this cyber issue, but that is a problem that we will solve over the next six months. What they're trying to do is use that issue to try and create a permanent new infrastructure in Washington. The classic 'never let a crisis go to waste' strategy.”

The All-In Podcast

150,106 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

NEW: James Carlson, one of the primary agitators in the recent Columbia's riots, turns out to be a millionaire’s heir with a long history of violent protests. A lawyer and self-styled anarchist, Carlson is the son of late ad mogul Dick Tarlow. Despite his privileged background, he boasts a rap sheet dating back to 2005, with numerous charges including assault on a police officer. Living in a lavish $3.4 million Brooklyn brownstone property, Carlson has been a fixture in anti-capitalist movements across the country. His latest escapade at Columbia involved breaking into the university, barricading doors, and causing substantial property damage, resulting in charges of burglary, reckless endangerment, and more. Moreover, Carlson faces a hate crime charge for an incident in April, where he allegedly set an Israel supporter’s flag on fire and assaulted the individual with a rock. This is only the latest in a string of protests he has led, which include disruptive actions at major New York City traffic arteries earlier this year. Carlson’s stepmother, currently linked romantically to singer John Cougar Mellencamp, shares ownership of a $15 million mansion on Fifth Avenue. His father, who passed away in 2022 leaving a $20 million estate, was a significant figure in advertising, associated with big names like Revlon and Ralph Lauren. Carlson (40), was arrested early Wednesday for his role in the violent takeover at Hamilton Hall.
1:55

NEW: James Carlson, one of the primary agitators in the recent Columbia's riots, turns out to be a millionaire’s heir with a long history of violent protests. A lawyer and self-styled anarchist, Carlson is the son of late ad mogul Dick Tarlow. Despite his privileged background, he boasts a rap sheet dating back to 2005, with numerous charges including assault on a police officer. Living in a lavish $3.4 million Brooklyn brownstone property, Carlson has been a fixture in anti-capitalist movements across the country. His latest escapade at Columbia involved breaking into the university, barricading doors, and causing substantial property damage, resulting in charges of burglary, reckless endangerment, and more. Moreover, Carlson faces a hate crime charge for an incident in April, where he allegedly set an Israel supporter’s flag on fire and assaulted the individual with a rock. This is only the latest in a string of protests he has led, which include disruptive actions at major New York City traffic arteries earlier this year. Carlson’s stepmother, currently linked romantically to singer John Cougar Mellencamp, shares ownership of a $15 million mansion on Fifth Avenue. His father, who passed away in 2022 leaving a $20 million estate, was a significant figure in advertising, associated with big names like Revlon and Ralph Lauren. Carlson (40), was arrested early Wednesday for his role in the violent takeover at Hamilton Hall.

Hank™

1,469,018 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Gavin Newsom’s Presidential Chances are Plummeting. Nate Silver Explains Why: “Newsom has fallen in Democratic primary polls from around 25% to 15%. He's fallen on Polymarket from like 33% to 22%.” Newsom’s biggest problems: -- His early lead was based on name brand, which has eroded -- Disastrous governance record in California -- Aligning with Biden and continuity with the unpopular "Resistance Libs" -- Dem voters now favor younger, more compelling candidates (AOC, Ossoff) Nate Silver: “I think he was benefiting from some degree of name recognition, whereas now Democrats see a candidate like Jon Ossoff in Georgia, another good-looking young guy, but who actually has credentials which Newsom will never have, having won an election in a purple state. I think it's good that Democrats are showing a bias toward younger candidates, right? That's a lot of what happened with Zohran, too. I wouldn't discount, by the way, someone like an AOC (as the 2028 nominee). I think ultimately Newsom has a hard argument to make. He's arguing for continuity with Kamala Harris and Joe Biden. He's embracing Joe Biden when that strategy has failed electorally. I would argue in California governance-wise as well. I think Newsom is actually in a pretty defensive position.” --------------------------------------- Thanks to our partners for making this possible! Starting a business? Northwest Registered Agent LLC gives you everything you need to build a complete Business Identity including free tools and built-in privacy. Get more at If your work depends on conversations — meetings, deal flow, interviews, customer calls — Plaud helps you capture and organize everything with highly accurate AI-generated notes that are not just simple summaries, but also highlight pain points, key decisions, next steps, and customizable summary templates. Check out Plaud at and use code ALLIN for up to 20% off! Which is also available on Amazon: (Code: ALLIN20X)
0:58

Gavin Newsom’s Presidential Chances are Plummeting. Nate Silver Explains Why: “Newsom has fallen in Democratic primary polls from around 25% to 15%. He's fallen on Polymarket from like 33% to 22%.” Newsom’s biggest problems: -- His early lead was based on name brand, which has eroded -- Disastrous governance record in California -- Aligning with Biden and continuity with the unpopular "Resistance Libs" -- Dem voters now favor younger, more compelling candidates (AOC, Ossoff) Nate Silver: “I think he was benefiting from some degree of name recognition, whereas now Democrats see a candidate like Jon Ossoff in Georgia, another good-looking young guy, but who actually has credentials which Newsom will never have, having won an election in a purple state. I think it's good that Democrats are showing a bias toward younger candidates, right? That's a lot of what happened with Zohran, too. I wouldn't discount, by the way, someone like an AOC (as the 2028 nominee). I think ultimately Newsom has a hard argument to make. He's arguing for continuity with Kamala Harris and Joe Biden. He's embracing Joe Biden when that strategy has failed electorally. I would argue in California governance-wise as well. I think Newsom is actually in a pretty defensive position.” --------------------------------------- Thanks to our partners for making this possible! Starting a business? Northwest Registered Agent LLC gives you everything you need to build a complete Business Identity including free tools and built-in privacy. Get more at If your work depends on conversations — meetings, deal flow, interviews, customer calls — Plaud helps you capture and organize everything with highly accurate AI-generated notes that are not just simple summaries, but also highlight pain points, key decisions, next steps, and customizable summary templates. Check out Plaud at and use code ALLIN for up to 20% off! Which is also available on Amazon: (Code: ALLIN20X)

The All-In Podcast

85,377 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Google just got executed by a Nobel Prize winner, the inventor of modern AI, and Donald Trump. They literally LOST the AI race in the most brutal way possible. Here is what happened: 5 days ago, Trump told Axios that Anthropic was a national security threat and warned that "people get put in prison immediately" for what the company had been doing with its frontier model exports. 4 days ago, Trump met Dario Amodei at the G7 AI Summit and walked out telling reporters Dario was a "nice guy, smart guy" who had "responded very responsibly." 3 days ago, Noam Shazeer, the co-author of "Attention Is All You Need" (the paper that invented the transformer architecture powering EVERY modern AI model on Earth), walked out of Google to join OpenAI. Yesterday, John Jumper, the 2024 Nobel Prize winner who co-created AlphaFold and ran Google DeepMind's protein structure team for nearly a decade, announced he was leaving to join Anthropic. And this is NOT a coincidence or a normal talent shuffle... Demis Hassabis, who shared the Nobel Prize with Jumper just 18 months ago, had to publicly THANK his own co-laureate for defecting to a rival lab. The man who shared the highest scientific honor in the world with you is now going to work for the people trying to put you out of business. This is what the end of a war looks like. The AI race was never going to be decided by chips, capital, or compute. There are only about 50 people on Earth who can actually build a frontier model from scratch. Google invented the field and trained most of them. They had the largest concentration of them anywhere on the planet. But in one week, two of the most important AI researchers alive betrayed them. And the actual reason is what's terrifying here: For nine months, the consensus take has been that Google's compute advantage would eventually win because talent is replaceable and compute is not. This week proved the opposite. Anthropic just secured a Nobel Prize winner whose work on AlphaFold opened the entire field of AI for biology. That is the same field every pharma company on Earth is desperately trying to enter. Anthropic now literally owns the most credentialed scientist in it. Meanwhile OpenAI just secured the actual inventor of the transformer. The man whose paper underpins every product Google has shipped in the last three years, including Gemini itself. Google has the compute but Google does not have the people who know what to do with it anymore. And the crazy part is that five days ago, Anthropic was effectively under siege. The administration was threatening PRISON, and the Mythos export crisis had triggered a federal block. Their largest investor was reportedly working against them while the company was hours from an existential national security designation that would have frozen them out of federal contracts. But four days later, Trump cleared them in public, they secured the most decorated AI researcher of the decade, and the entire frontier AI duopoly locked in with Anthropic in pole position. The fastest reversal of fortune in modern corporate history. "It's a two-horse race at the frontier. Google is effectively out." Wall Street wakes up to this in six months and starts downgrading Alphabet. But the smart money already knows. Anthropic is being whispered at a $2 trillion valuation. OpenAI is approaching $500 billion in the private market. Gemini 3.5 Pro has been delayed with no public timeline. The AI race literally ended this week. What do you think?
1:20

Google just got executed by a Nobel Prize winner, the inventor of modern AI, and Donald Trump. They literally LOST the AI race in the most brutal way possible. Here is what happened: 5 days ago, Trump told Axios that Anthropic was a national security threat and warned that "people get put in prison immediately" for what the company had been doing with its frontier model exports. 4 days ago, Trump met Dario Amodei at the G7 AI Summit and walked out telling reporters Dario was a "nice guy, smart guy" who had "responded very responsibly." 3 days ago, Noam Shazeer, the co-author of "Attention Is All You Need" (the paper that invented the transformer architecture powering EVERY modern AI model on Earth), walked out of Google to join OpenAI. Yesterday, John Jumper, the 2024 Nobel Prize winner who co-created AlphaFold and ran Google DeepMind's protein structure team for nearly a decade, announced he was leaving to join Anthropic. And this is NOT a coincidence or a normal talent shuffle... Demis Hassabis, who shared the Nobel Prize with Jumper just 18 months ago, had to publicly THANK his own co-laureate for defecting to a rival lab. The man who shared the highest scientific honor in the world with you is now going to work for the people trying to put you out of business. This is what the end of a war looks like. The AI race was never going to be decided by chips, capital, or compute. There are only about 50 people on Earth who can actually build a frontier model from scratch. Google invented the field and trained most of them. They had the largest concentration of them anywhere on the planet. But in one week, two of the most important AI researchers alive betrayed them. And the actual reason is what's terrifying here: For nine months, the consensus take has been that Google's compute advantage would eventually win because talent is replaceable and compute is not. This week proved the opposite. Anthropic just secured a Nobel Prize winner whose work on AlphaFold opened the entire field of AI for biology. That is the same field every pharma company on Earth is desperately trying to enter. Anthropic now literally owns the most credentialed scientist in it. Meanwhile OpenAI just secured the actual inventor of the transformer. The man whose paper underpins every product Google has shipped in the last three years, including Gemini itself. Google has the compute but Google does not have the people who know what to do with it anymore. And the crazy part is that five days ago, Anthropic was effectively under siege. The administration was threatening PRISON, and the Mythos export crisis had triggered a federal block. Their largest investor was reportedly working against them while the company was hours from an existential national security designation that would have frozen them out of federal contracts. But four days later, Trump cleared them in public, they secured the most decorated AI researcher of the decade, and the entire frontier AI duopoly locked in with Anthropic in pole position. The fastest reversal of fortune in modern corporate history. "It's a two-horse race at the frontier. Google is effectively out." Wall Street wakes up to this in six months and starts downgrading Alphabet. But the smart money already knows. Anthropic is being whispered at a $2 trillion valuation. OpenAI is approaching $500 billion in the private market. Gemini 3.5 Pro has been delayed with no public timeline. The AI race literally ended this week. What do you think?

Ricardo

90,843 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

California Reporter is losing her mind that no one is listening to the real reality that medieval diseases are returning on the streets of Los Angeles “Feel like I'm losing my mind in the state of California here. I'm a conservative political reporter, and literally any progressive Dem that we cover or any candidate has their priorities completely backward — we were just down in LA to report on how the city has been completely overrun by rats who have caused a 2003% increase in typhus cases from 2009 to now. So here in LA, you can contract a medieval disease because rats and the fleas that live on them are running around homeless encampments, gnawing on homeless people's open wounds, and then spreading it to the rest of the city. The city's completely filthy. There are water pipes breaking in the streets every day. There are rats running around, homeless encampments everywhere, fentanyl everywhere, and I just don't think now is the most important time to be talking about how bad billionaires are when your own city is in complete disorder” I looked into this and she’s right, over 7 medieval diseases are being found because of the homeless conditions in California - Typhus (flea-borne/murine typhus) A major recurring issue; outbreaks linked to rats and fleas in Skid Row encampments - Tuberculosis (TB) Multiple outbreaks documented, including in Skid Row shelters and streets; described as one of the worst in a decade in some reports. Highly contagious in dense, unsanitary conditions. - Typhoid fever: Rare but reported cases among Skid Row, it’s spread to adjacent populations and even LAPD officers; spread via feces - Hepatitis A is being found in outbreaks tied to poor hygiene and sanitation in homeless areas, including Skid Row. - Shigellosis (bacillary dysentery) Fecal-oral transmission in areas with inadequate toilets and trash - Staph infections / MRS - Rare reports or concerns about conditions ripe for plague (Yersinia pestis via fleas), scurvy (vitamin deficiency), or even leprosy-like symptoms California Democrats are literally bringing back medieval diseases
2:44

California Reporter is losing her mind that no one is listening to the real reality that medieval diseases are returning on the streets of Los Angeles “Feel like I'm losing my mind in the state of California here. I'm a conservative political reporter, and literally any progressive Dem that we cover or any candidate has their priorities completely backward — we were just down in LA to report on how the city has been completely overrun by rats who have caused a 2003% increase in typhus cases from 2009 to now. So here in LA, you can contract a medieval disease because rats and the fleas that live on them are running around homeless encampments, gnawing on homeless people's open wounds, and then spreading it to the rest of the city. The city's completely filthy. There are water pipes breaking in the streets every day. There are rats running around, homeless encampments everywhere, fentanyl everywhere, and I just don't think now is the most important time to be talking about how bad billionaires are when your own city is in complete disorder” I looked into this and she’s right, over 7 medieval diseases are being found because of the homeless conditions in California - Typhus (flea-borne/murine typhus) A major recurring issue; outbreaks linked to rats and fleas in Skid Row encampments - Tuberculosis (TB) Multiple outbreaks documented, including in Skid Row shelters and streets; described as one of the worst in a decade in some reports. Highly contagious in dense, unsanitary conditions. - Typhoid fever: Rare but reported cases among Skid Row, it’s spread to adjacent populations and even LAPD officers; spread via feces - Hepatitis A is being found in outbreaks tied to poor hygiene and sanitation in homeless areas, including Skid Row. - Shigellosis (bacillary dysentery) Fecal-oral transmission in areas with inadequate toilets and trash - Staph infections / MRS - Rare reports or concerns about conditions ripe for plague (Yersinia pestis via fleas), scurvy (vitamin deficiency), or even leprosy-like symptoms California Democrats are literally bringing back medieval diseases

Wall Street Apes

437,893 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🚨Ukraine is a GANGSTER STATE Oliver Stone about NATO, Ukraine, Russia, US The United States found itself caught in the trap. We're supporting Ukraine, which is a gangster state. US is fighting 'indirect war' with Russia. That is the worst foreign policy decision probably within recent. I mean, just go back to the turn of the century. What do we need NATO for? The problem was that a lot of Eastern Europe went fascist against Russia, and they stay fascist. This is a very complicated issue because the United States found itself caught in the trap. Right. I mean, we're supporting Ukraine, which is a gangster state, basically against the legitimate interests of Russia, and we're attacking Russia. I mean, it's basically a indirect war on Russia. We've started with the stated gold said by several people, including Biden and his secretary of defense. The point is to weaken Russia. That is the worst foreign policy decision probably within recent. I mean, just go back to the turn of the century where George Kennan was at least alive, and he was a tough guy. He was not a pro soviet guy, but he just warned us about NATO. He said that, what do we need NATO for? And I still wonder, what do we need NATO for? It's a big, superannuated, superficial organization. We don't need it because everybody. Shumer was on TV, that senator from New York, another senator from New York, who I think is also partially insane. I despise him. And he's saying that if the Russians take Ukraine, they're going to be marching over Europe. Sure. We heard that in 1943/44 that they were going to take over Europe. Did they? No, they were not interested in that at all. They wanted to recover from their war. They lost so much of their nation fighting the Nazis. They're against fascists, always have been. They hate them. The problem was that a lot of Eastern Europe went fascist against Russia, and they stay fascist. They don't announce it that way, but they certainly act it. That makes the world a very tricky situation.
1:58

🚨Ukraine is a GANGSTER STATE Oliver Stone about NATO, Ukraine, Russia, US The United States found itself caught in the trap. We're supporting Ukraine, which is a gangster state. US is fighting 'indirect war' with Russia. That is the worst foreign policy decision probably within recent. I mean, just go back to the turn of the century. What do we need NATO for? The problem was that a lot of Eastern Europe went fascist against Russia, and they stay fascist. This is a very complicated issue because the United States found itself caught in the trap. Right. I mean, we're supporting Ukraine, which is a gangster state, basically against the legitimate interests of Russia, and we're attacking Russia. I mean, it's basically a indirect war on Russia. We've started with the stated gold said by several people, including Biden and his secretary of defense. The point is to weaken Russia. That is the worst foreign policy decision probably within recent. I mean, just go back to the turn of the century where George Kennan was at least alive, and he was a tough guy. He was not a pro soviet guy, but he just warned us about NATO. He said that, what do we need NATO for? And I still wonder, what do we need NATO for? It's a big, superannuated, superficial organization. We don't need it because everybody. Shumer was on TV, that senator from New York, another senator from New York, who I think is also partially insane. I despise him. And he's saying that if the Russians take Ukraine, they're going to be marching over Europe. Sure. We heard that in 1943/44 that they were going to take over Europe. Did they? No, they were not interested in that at all. They wanted to recover from their war. They lost so much of their nation fighting the Nazis. They're against fascists, always have been. They hate them. The problem was that a lot of Eastern Europe went fascist against Russia, and they stay fascist. They don't announce it that way, but they certainly act it. That makes the world a very tricky situation.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

37,972 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад