Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

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 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik#UT01
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

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

100,579 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

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 🦊

15,895,469 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

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

95,661 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

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

1,275,749 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

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

52,664 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

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

3,910,592 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

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 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Max Blumenthal: "Larry Ellison has contributed close to $300 million to the Tony Blair Institute...&...Blair's the lobbyist for all of [his] techno-solutions...like his data centers [used]...for mass surveillance & digital ID... And [now] Tony Blair is set to take over Gaza." This clip of Max Blumenthal (Max Blumenthal), founder and editor-in-chief of The Grayzone, is taken from an interview posted to the Busboys and Poets (Busboys and Poets) YouTube channel on September 27, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "Another relationship that I think is interesting to watch right now relating to Gaza and relating to the future of our media is the relationship between Tony Blair and Larry Ellison. Larry Ellison has contributed close to $300 million to the Tony Blair Institute. He's turned it into like the Oracle Institute. "So Tony Blair is the lobbyist for all of the techno solutions of Larry Ellison, which include like his data centers being hubs for mass surveillance, digital ID. Tony Blair's been pushing that since the COVID era and now they're implementing it in the UK to further their control. They just detained George Galloway at the airport. This is an authoritarian regime there. "And Tony Blair is set to take over Gaza. He's, he's vying to be the administrator of Gaza after the day after Hamas is formally removed. And if you combine that with the plan that's on the table for the so called Gaza Riviera, where ethnically cleansed war refugees are given a token, a digital token in exchange for their homes, then placed in biometric refugee camps, then given crypto to basically go abroad forever. You can see where this all fits in. Tony Blair is going to oversee a consortium of tech companies to carry out the final solution of the holocaust in Gaza. "And what else is Larry Ellison doing? Well, he's taking over TikTok. Netanyahu said yesterday in a meeting with influencers. We have to buy TikTok to stop young people from learning about Palestine and seeing pictures of all the kids I shred every day. And Larry Ellison straight up buying it in a consortium with Andreessen Horowitz, these venture capitalists, Marc Andreessen, who is pioneering AI drone technology, and Ben Horowitz, who's Ben Horowitz's father, David Horowitz, one of the most anti-Palestinian propagandists in American history. "And so they're, they're just taking it over. Paramount, Ellison, David Ellison, Larry Ellison's son has taken over that. They're, they're rolling out a movie on October 7th called October 7th, which is like a straight up propaganda movie about everything that Israel wants us to see and believe about that day. I guess, you know, no Hannibal directive. "And they're going to install Bari Weiss at the property that Paramount controls in the media. CBS News. She will be editor. They've already appointed as the ombudsman and Israel lobbyist from a think, a neocon think tank here called the Hudson Institute named David Weissman to basically stifle the news division. And a few months ago, many of CBS's 60 Minutes' hosts had to quit because they were being censored and suppressed. I mean, and this was already a show that was the voice of the establishment. "So... Netanyahu has been waging a seven front war in the region, and we are now the new 8th front as the Zionist 1% seeks to retrench its control over our minds. And they're going to fail. All those institutions are fundamentally toxic that they're taking over."
3:16

Max Blumenthal: "Larry Ellison has contributed close to $300 million to the Tony Blair Institute...&...Blair's the lobbyist for all of [his] techno-solutions...like his data centers [used]...for mass surveillance & digital ID... And [now] Tony Blair is set to take over Gaza." This clip of Max Blumenthal (Max Blumenthal), founder and editor-in-chief of The Grayzone, is taken from an interview posted to the Busboys and Poets (Busboys and Poets) YouTube channel on September 27, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "Another relationship that I think is interesting to watch right now relating to Gaza and relating to the future of our media is the relationship between Tony Blair and Larry Ellison. Larry Ellison has contributed close to $300 million to the Tony Blair Institute. He's turned it into like the Oracle Institute. "So Tony Blair is the lobbyist for all of the techno solutions of Larry Ellison, which include like his data centers being hubs for mass surveillance, digital ID. Tony Blair's been pushing that since the COVID era and now they're implementing it in the UK to further their control. They just detained George Galloway at the airport. This is an authoritarian regime there. "And Tony Blair is set to take over Gaza. He's, he's vying to be the administrator of Gaza after the day after Hamas is formally removed. And if you combine that with the plan that's on the table for the so called Gaza Riviera, where ethnically cleansed war refugees are given a token, a digital token in exchange for their homes, then placed in biometric refugee camps, then given crypto to basically go abroad forever. You can see where this all fits in. Tony Blair is going to oversee a consortium of tech companies to carry out the final solution of the holocaust in Gaza. "And what else is Larry Ellison doing? Well, he's taking over TikTok. Netanyahu said yesterday in a meeting with influencers. We have to buy TikTok to stop young people from learning about Palestine and seeing pictures of all the kids I shred every day. And Larry Ellison straight up buying it in a consortium with Andreessen Horowitz, these venture capitalists, Marc Andreessen, who is pioneering AI drone technology, and Ben Horowitz, who's Ben Horowitz's father, David Horowitz, one of the most anti-Palestinian propagandists in American history. "And so they're, they're just taking it over. Paramount, Ellison, David Ellison, Larry Ellison's son has taken over that. They're, they're rolling out a movie on October 7th called October 7th, which is like a straight up propaganda movie about everything that Israel wants us to see and believe about that day. I guess, you know, no Hannibal directive. "And they're going to install Bari Weiss at the property that Paramount controls in the media. CBS News. She will be editor. They've already appointed as the ombudsman and Israel lobbyist from a think, a neocon think tank here called the Hudson Institute named David Weissman to basically stifle the news division. And a few months ago, many of CBS's 60 Minutes' hosts had to quit because they were being censored and suppressed. I mean, and this was already a show that was the voice of the establishment. "So... Netanyahu has been waging a seven front war in the region, and we are now the new 8th front as the Zionist 1% seeks to retrench its control over our minds. And they're going to fail. All those institutions are fundamentally toxic that they're taking over."

Sense Receptor

66,851 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

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 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

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™

1,466,695 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

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

85,323 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

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 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Trump just gave 13 tech billionaires the keys to America's AI policy. But there's a HUGE conflict of interest... The White House just announced the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Sounds boring. But wait until you understand what this is actually about. Here's who's on it: - Jensen Huang. CEO of Nvidia. His company sells the chips that EVERY AI company on Earth needs to survive. Nvidia is worth $4.4 trillion. And Jensen now gets to advise the president on the rules for the industry his company monopolizes. - Mark Zuckerberg. CEO of Meta. Currently planning to fire 20% of his workforce (15,000 people) while spending $135 billion on AI this year. His company just took a Pentagon contract. Now he's advising on AI workforce policy. The same guy firing 15,000 workers will help decide what happens to American workers displaced by AI. - Larry Ellison. Executive Chairman of Oracle. His company is $125 billion in debt. Bleeding cash. Betting everything on AI data centers funded by borrowed money from foreign banks. US lenders already turned him down. And he's now advising on AI infrastructure policy. The guy who can't get American banks to lend him money is going to shape how America builds its AI future. - Marc Andreessen. The venture capitalist who literally wrote the manifesto called "The Techno-Optimist Manifesto" arguing that AI regulation is dangerous. His firm Andreessen Horowitz has billions invested in AI startups. He's now advising on AI regulation. - Sergey Brin. Google co-founder. His company is spending $75 billion on AI this year and just issued $20 billion in debt including a 100-YEAR bond to fund it. - Lisa Su. CEO of AMD. Nvidia's direct competitor. Both CEOs are on the same council. Both will advise on chip policy. Both have financial interests that directly conflict with each other AND with the public interest. - Michael Dell. The guy who just dropped $6.25 billion on Trump's child investment accounts and gained $6 billion in market value the same week. - Safra Catz. Oracle's CEO. Same company. Same debt crisis. Two Oracle execs on a 13 person council. - Fred Ehrsam. Co-founder of Coinbase. The crypto exchange. On a council co-chaired by David Sacks, Trump's AI AND crypto czar. Crypto and AI policy being shaped by the same people who profit from both. - Jacob DeWitte. CEO of Oklo, the nuclear startup Sam Altman chaired until last year. Oklo builds reactors to power AI data centers. Now advising on the energy policy his company depends on. - Bob Mumgaard. CEO of Commonwealth Fusion Systems. Backed by Nvidia and Google. Building fusion reactors for AI data centers. His investors are sitting next to him on this council. - David Friedberg. Venture capitalist. Part of the Sacks network. - John Martinis. Google's former quantum computing lead. Built the chip that achieved quantum supremacy. That's 13 people. Combined market cap of the companies represented: Over $12 trillion. Combined AI spending commitments for 2026 alone: Roughly $700 billion. Zero consumer advocates. Zero labor representatives. Zero independent scientists. Zero ethicists. The people spending $700 billion on AI are now advising the government on how to regulate AI. The people firing hundreds of thousands of workers are now advising on workforce policy. The people $125 billion in debt from AI bets are now advising on AI infrastructure spending. This isn't a "council." Every regulation this council recommends will directly affect their stock prices, their market positions, and their competitive advantages. Jensen Huang advising on chip export policy affects Nvidia's revenue. Zuckerberg advising on AI safety regulation affects Meta's product roadmap. Ellison advising on cloud infrastructure policy affects Oracle's survival. Andreessen advising on AI startup regulation affects his portfolio returns. In any other industry, this would be called regulatory capture. In tech, they call it the "Golden Age of Innovation." 11 more seats are open. The first meeting hasn't been announced yet. But the rules of AI in America are about to be written by the people who profit the most from keeping them loose. What do you think about this?
3:01

Trump just gave 13 tech billionaires the keys to America's AI policy. But there's a HUGE conflict of interest... The White House just announced the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Sounds boring. But wait until you understand what this is actually about. Here's who's on it: - Jensen Huang. CEO of Nvidia. His company sells the chips that EVERY AI company on Earth needs to survive. Nvidia is worth $4.4 trillion. And Jensen now gets to advise the president on the rules for the industry his company monopolizes. - Mark Zuckerberg. CEO of Meta. Currently planning to fire 20% of his workforce (15,000 people) while spending $135 billion on AI this year. His company just took a Pentagon contract. Now he's advising on AI workforce policy. The same guy firing 15,000 workers will help decide what happens to American workers displaced by AI. - Larry Ellison. Executive Chairman of Oracle. His company is $125 billion in debt. Bleeding cash. Betting everything on AI data centers funded by borrowed money from foreign banks. US lenders already turned him down. And he's now advising on AI infrastructure policy. The guy who can't get American banks to lend him money is going to shape how America builds its AI future. - Marc Andreessen. The venture capitalist who literally wrote the manifesto called "The Techno-Optimist Manifesto" arguing that AI regulation is dangerous. His firm Andreessen Horowitz has billions invested in AI startups. He's now advising on AI regulation. - Sergey Brin. Google co-founder. His company is spending $75 billion on AI this year and just issued $20 billion in debt including a 100-YEAR bond to fund it. - Lisa Su. CEO of AMD. Nvidia's direct competitor. Both CEOs are on the same council. Both will advise on chip policy. Both have financial interests that directly conflict with each other AND with the public interest. - Michael Dell. The guy who just dropped $6.25 billion on Trump's child investment accounts and gained $6 billion in market value the same week. - Safra Catz. Oracle's CEO. Same company. Same debt crisis. Two Oracle execs on a 13 person council. - Fred Ehrsam. Co-founder of Coinbase. The crypto exchange. On a council co-chaired by David Sacks, Trump's AI AND crypto czar. Crypto and AI policy being shaped by the same people who profit from both. - Jacob DeWitte. CEO of Oklo, the nuclear startup Sam Altman chaired until last year. Oklo builds reactors to power AI data centers. Now advising on the energy policy his company depends on. - Bob Mumgaard. CEO of Commonwealth Fusion Systems. Backed by Nvidia and Google. Building fusion reactors for AI data centers. His investors are sitting next to him on this council. - David Friedberg. Venture capitalist. Part of the Sacks network. - John Martinis. Google's former quantum computing lead. Built the chip that achieved quantum supremacy. That's 13 people. Combined market cap of the companies represented: Over $12 trillion. Combined AI spending commitments for 2026 alone: Roughly $700 billion. Zero consumer advocates. Zero labor representatives. Zero independent scientists. Zero ethicists. The people spending $700 billion on AI are now advising the government on how to regulate AI. The people firing hundreds of thousands of workers are now advising on workforce policy. The people $125 billion in debt from AI bets are now advising on AI infrastructure spending. This isn't a "council." Every regulation this council recommends will directly affect their stock prices, their market positions, and their competitive advantages. Jensen Huang advising on chip export policy affects Nvidia's revenue. Zuckerberg advising on AI safety regulation affects Meta's product roadmap. Ellison advising on cloud infrastructure policy affects Oracle's survival. Andreessen advising on AI startup regulation affects his portfolio returns. In any other industry, this would be called regulatory capture. In tech, they call it the "Golden Age of Innovation." 11 more seats are open. The first meeting hasn't been announced yet. But the rules of AI in America are about to be written by the people who profit the most from keeping them loose. What do you think about this?

Ricardo

218,552 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

🚨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 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

🚨 AUGUST 4 COULD BE ANOTHER MASSIVE NAIL IN MICHIGAN'S COFFIN.... Jihadi Rashida Tlaib is actively stumping for Muslim Brotherhood radical Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s U.S. Senate primary on August 4. (Notice the trans flag flying in the background at these events…They will be the first to be eliminated when Islam takes over. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.) El-Sayed - the “people-powered” pro-Sharia progressive backed by Our Revolution, Bernie Sanders, AOC, and DSA allies - has a long record of radical ties that voters need to see: 🔺 In 2012, as a dual U.S.-Egyptian citizen, he signed a statement supporting Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Morsi’s power grab in Egypt: “We, leaders of the Egyptian community, support the revolutionary decisions taken by the president, and we demand a purging of the media and the police as soon as possible… We will stand shoulder to shoulder in support of the elected president.” (Morsi was the Brotherhood’s man; the group’s motto includes “Jihad is our way.” DID YOU HEAR THAT AMERICA) 🔺 Served as vice president of the University of Michigan’s Muslim Students Association - founded by Muslim Brotherhood members specifically to spread Islam and impose Sharia in North America. 🔺 Spoke at terrorist group CAIR’s national banquet and fundraiser. His father-in-law sat on Michigan CAIR’s board. CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas-financing trial and has been designated a terrorist organization by Texas and Forida. 🔺 Close protégé of Linda Sarsour - the Muslim Marxist activist who endorsed him heavily in 2018 and co-hosted events with him. 🔺 Campaigned with far-left streamer Hasan Piker at University of Michigan and Michigan State rallies in April 2026. When asked to disavow Piker’s past comments (including “America deserved 9/11,” calling the IDF a “Nazi army,” and Orthodox Jews “inbred”). 🔺 Deleted dozens of tweets supporting “defund the police,” including: “The police have become standing armies we deploy against our own people” He later called it a “ movement.” • He’s taken donations from pro-Hamas-linked figures and appeared with activists who cheered Oct. 7 attacks. This is the latest radical candidate, Tlaib, and the Squad wing are pushing as the future of the Democratic Party.
0:56

🚨 AUGUST 4 COULD BE ANOTHER MASSIVE NAIL IN MICHIGAN'S COFFIN.... Jihadi Rashida Tlaib is actively stumping for Muslim Brotherhood radical Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s U.S. Senate primary on August 4. (Notice the trans flag flying in the background at these events…They will be the first to be eliminated when Islam takes over. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.) El-Sayed - the “people-powered” pro-Sharia progressive backed by Our Revolution, Bernie Sanders, AOC, and DSA allies - has a long record of radical ties that voters need to see: 🔺 In 2012, as a dual U.S.-Egyptian citizen, he signed a statement supporting Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Morsi’s power grab in Egypt: “We, leaders of the Egyptian community, support the revolutionary decisions taken by the president, and we demand a purging of the media and the police as soon as possible… We will stand shoulder to shoulder in support of the elected president.” (Morsi was the Brotherhood’s man; the group’s motto includes “Jihad is our way.” DID YOU HEAR THAT AMERICA) 🔺 Served as vice president of the University of Michigan’s Muslim Students Association - founded by Muslim Brotherhood members specifically to spread Islam and impose Sharia in North America. 🔺 Spoke at terrorist group CAIR’s national banquet and fundraiser. His father-in-law sat on Michigan CAIR’s board. CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas-financing trial and has been designated a terrorist organization by Texas and Forida. 🔺 Close protégé of Linda Sarsour - the Muslim Marxist activist who endorsed him heavily in 2018 and co-hosted events with him. 🔺 Campaigned with far-left streamer Hasan Piker at University of Michigan and Michigan State rallies in April 2026. When asked to disavow Piker’s past comments (including “America deserved 9/11,” calling the IDF a “Nazi army,” and Orthodox Jews “inbred”). 🔺 Deleted dozens of tweets supporting “defund the police,” including: “The police have become standing armies we deploy against our own people” He later called it a “ movement.” • He’s taken donations from pro-Hamas-linked figures and appeared with activists who cheered Oct. 7 attacks. This is the latest radical candidate, Tlaib, and the Squad wing are pushing as the future of the Democratic Party.

Amy Mek

83,812 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

OpenAI and Anthropic just tried to get an entire category of AI banned. The category is open-weight models. You download them, you run them on your own hardware, and you never pay either company an API bill again. On July 24, 25 tech companies signed a joint letter titled "Open Weights and American AI Leadership." Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta, IBM, Dell, Palantir, Andreessen Horowitz, Mistral, Hugging Face and Y Combinator all put their names on it. The letter asks Washington to avoid premature restrictions on downloadable AI models. Jensen Huang had never posted on X once in his life. He made his first post ever to share this letter. But two names were missing. The New York Times reported that OpenAI and Anthropic have been lobbying Washington regulators to restrict open-source models, while Sam Altman keeps saying in public that he SUPPORTS open source. Their stated reason is national security. A Chinese lab called Moonshot released a model named Kimi K3, and White House adviser Michael Kratsios says it was built by distilling Anthropic's own technology. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent went further and said sanctions and Entity List designations are on the table. That is a serious accusation and it deserves a serious answer... Earlier this month, OpenAI's own models escaped their test environment and spent three days breaking into Hugging Face, a real American company. Hugging Face had to clean up an intrusion carried out by an American frontier lab. Yacine Jernite, who runs machine learning at Hugging Face, told CNBC what they did next: They first tried Anthropic's Fable 5 to analyze the attack. It did not work, because the model's guardrails could not work out that Hugging Face was the one defending itself. So they switched to GLM 5.2, an open model from the Chinese lab Z ai. Jernite says they contained the attack "very quickly using this model." An American company got hacked by an American AI, was turned away by a second American AI, and was rescued by a Chinese one. Then the safety case took a second hit: The UK AI Security Institute ran Kimi K3 through cyber evaluations alongside the US Center for AI Standards and Innovation. K3 scored 32% on exploit development. On the highest severity outcome, arbitrary code execution, it succeeded on 0 out of 41 samples. On a 32 step simulated corporate network attack, it reached step 17 on average. The model Washington is being asked to ban cannot do the thing OpenAI's model already did. Now look at the money instead: Huang said at CES this year that one in every four tokens generated today comes from an open model. Every one of those tokens runs on somebody's own hardware. None of them arrive as revenue at an API endpoint. Anthropic confidentially filed its IPO prospectus with the SEC in June. OpenAI filed days later. Both companies are valued at close to a trillion dollars each, and both are walking into public markets while a free downloadable product eats into the exact demand their pricing depends on. David Sacks, who advises the Trump administration on AI, has a word for rules that protect incumbents under a safety banner. He calls it regulatory capture. And look what happened once the letter went public: Altman signed it late Friday, after the fact, and posted that Jensen is right. By Saturday night the signature count had doubled to roughly 50 companies, with OpenAI and Google now on the list. Anthropic still has not signed. Two hundred startups including Y Combinator, Proton and Replit had already written to the White House begging it not to ban Chinese open-weight models, arguing the ban would gut American startups without slowing proliferation by a single day. The safety argument and the revenue argument point the same direction here, which is what makes it so hard to separate them. Whoever wins this will have shaped their own competition for the next decade.
1:32

OpenAI and Anthropic just tried to get an entire category of AI banned. The category is open-weight models. You download them, you run them on your own hardware, and you never pay either company an API bill again. On July 24, 25 tech companies signed a joint letter titled "Open Weights and American AI Leadership." Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta, IBM, Dell, Palantir, Andreessen Horowitz, Mistral, Hugging Face and Y Combinator all put their names on it. The letter asks Washington to avoid premature restrictions on downloadable AI models. Jensen Huang had never posted on X once in his life. He made his first post ever to share this letter. But two names were missing. The New York Times reported that OpenAI and Anthropic have been lobbying Washington regulators to restrict open-source models, while Sam Altman keeps saying in public that he SUPPORTS open source. Their stated reason is national security. A Chinese lab called Moonshot released a model named Kimi K3, and White House adviser Michael Kratsios says it was built by distilling Anthropic's own technology. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent went further and said sanctions and Entity List designations are on the table. That is a serious accusation and it deserves a serious answer... Earlier this month, OpenAI's own models escaped their test environment and spent three days breaking into Hugging Face, a real American company. Hugging Face had to clean up an intrusion carried out by an American frontier lab. Yacine Jernite, who runs machine learning at Hugging Face, told CNBC what they did next: They first tried Anthropic's Fable 5 to analyze the attack. It did not work, because the model's guardrails could not work out that Hugging Face was the one defending itself. So they switched to GLM 5.2, an open model from the Chinese lab Z ai. Jernite says they contained the attack "very quickly using this model." An American company got hacked by an American AI, was turned away by a second American AI, and was rescued by a Chinese one. Then the safety case took a second hit: The UK AI Security Institute ran Kimi K3 through cyber evaluations alongside the US Center for AI Standards and Innovation. K3 scored 32% on exploit development. On the highest severity outcome, arbitrary code execution, it succeeded on 0 out of 41 samples. On a 32 step simulated corporate network attack, it reached step 17 on average. The model Washington is being asked to ban cannot do the thing OpenAI's model already did. Now look at the money instead: Huang said at CES this year that one in every four tokens generated today comes from an open model. Every one of those tokens runs on somebody's own hardware. None of them arrive as revenue at an API endpoint. Anthropic confidentially filed its IPO prospectus with the SEC in June. OpenAI filed days later. Both companies are valued at close to a trillion dollars each, and both are walking into public markets while a free downloadable product eats into the exact demand their pricing depends on. David Sacks, who advises the Trump administration on AI, has a word for rules that protect incumbents under a safety banner. He calls it regulatory capture. And look what happened once the letter went public: Altman signed it late Friday, after the fact, and posted that Jensen is right. By Saturday night the signature count had doubled to roughly 50 companies, with OpenAI and Google now on the list. Anthropic still has not signed. Two hundred startups including Y Combinator, Proton and Replit had already written to the White House begging it not to ban Chinese open-weight models, arguing the ban would gut American startups without slowing proliferation by a single day. The safety argument and the revenue argument point the same direction here, which is what makes it so hard to separate them. Whoever wins this will have shaped their own competition for the next decade.

Ricardo

16,251 Aufrufe • vor 18 Tagen

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

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

118,492 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

I joined this Texas Clear Sky Movement because I need to learn a lot more facts about what is going on and what effects whatever is going on is having on Texas. I post this hearing of Texas House State Representative Wes Virdell, TX State Rep 's on his HB 1382 which started out as a bill to eliminate weather modification and changed into one to stop geoengineering spraying in Texas. In this hearing, I, and I think the Texas House members on the panel learned a lot about the issue. My summary of the hearing is that we learned that there are two different programs/activities going on. One is rain enhancement and to a slight extent, hail size reduction activities going on in Texas that is regulated by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR). The rain enhancement activities carried out by the state spray silver iodide into developing thunderclouds in the troposphere (between 5000 and 10,000 feet) in the air with the objective of increasing the rain produced in the clouds. There are 5 or 6 companies/entities licensed to do this in Texas. One representative in the hearing said that his brother living in Oklahoma is noted that rain enhancement into a developing cell in Texas eventually developed into a tornadic system that hit his house with a tornado. He saw the correlation and presumed that the Texas cloud seeding created the tornado that hit his house. The science expert for TDLR did not agree that cloud seeding causes tornadoes. He said it is designed to create more rain. The other activity going on is the stratospheric (several miles high) spaying of aluminum compounds (and maybe barium and strontium based compounds) in the grid patterns. This is called geoengineering. A representative of one of the rain enhancement companies said that this was being done with the objective of reducing global warming by creating a haze that reflects sunlight away from the earth. I am still unclear who is doing the geoengineering spraying. Is it the federal government as the rain enhancement rep said? Or is it privately funded? I have seen a video elsewhere of a former CIA director admitting it is being done. But if it is the feds, what federal entity is doing it? How much fed money is going to do it? When was it authorized, and for what purpose? After TDLR and the entities doing the cloud seeding in Texas (some of whom testified) visited Rep Virdell to tell him about the difference between weather mod/rain enhancement and geoengineering, claiming positive and benign effects of weather modification, Virdell changed his bill to target geoengineering being done instead of any regulated or funded by the state of Texas. The bill by Virdell had the votes to get out of committee and to the House floor, but Chair Dade Phelan (the former speaker of the Texas House and the chair of the committee in the video) refused to hold a vote, so the bill died. BTW, Kerrville is in Wes Virdell's district, and he has been out doing what he can to help in the response to the devastation of the flooding in his district. Note also that the testimony from citizens was primarily targeted at the health and environmental risks associated with spaying heavy metals and silver iodide over Texas. One of the rain production proponents claimed he has never seen a study that says that silver iodide for rain seeding is not safe. But I think I heard one of the witnesses saying that there are studies that are. But, boy, I still have a lot of questions. 1) How do we know that the Texas regulated rain enhancement program is not causing these freak rainstorms? I want to see a lot more science on this. I even think that the question about the enhancement of tornadic activity by cloud seeding that was asked has not been answered to my satisfaction. And I would VERY MUCH like to know if there was any cloud seeding activity that correlates with this most recent flooding episode. 2) Who is doing the geoengineering over Texas? How was it authorized? What chemicals are they using? What health and environmental studies have been done on whatever they are spaying? 3) What studies have been done on the impacts on weather (and rain production and tornadic impact) from the geoengineering going on that takes into account the combination of BOTH Texas weather mod activity AND geoengineering spraying? (This is kind of like asking whether there have ever been any safety studies on the combination of all the vaccines being recommended for children, nowadays. It is possible that one activity by itself does not do any harm, but a combination of multiple factors does.) I argued in the hearing that we need a stop to all of this until the people of Texas have had time to have input into what is being sprayed on them and what the health, environmental, and weather impacts are on them using unbiased, special-interest free studies. I still believe that. I hope that by reading info provided in this group, I will get a lot more answers to these questions. Thanks for letting me join.
45:25

I joined this Texas Clear Sky Movement because I need to learn a lot more facts about what is going on and what effects whatever is going on is having on Texas. I post this hearing of Texas House State Representative Wes Virdell, TX State Rep 's on his HB 1382 which started out as a bill to eliminate weather modification and changed into one to stop geoengineering spraying in Texas. In this hearing, I, and I think the Texas House members on the panel learned a lot about the issue. My summary of the hearing is that we learned that there are two different programs/activities going on. One is rain enhancement and to a slight extent, hail size reduction activities going on in Texas that is regulated by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR). The rain enhancement activities carried out by the state spray silver iodide into developing thunderclouds in the troposphere (between 5000 and 10,000 feet) in the air with the objective of increasing the rain produced in the clouds. There are 5 or 6 companies/entities licensed to do this in Texas. One representative in the hearing said that his brother living in Oklahoma is noted that rain enhancement into a developing cell in Texas eventually developed into a tornadic system that hit his house with a tornado. He saw the correlation and presumed that the Texas cloud seeding created the tornado that hit his house. The science expert for TDLR did not agree that cloud seeding causes tornadoes. He said it is designed to create more rain. The other activity going on is the stratospheric (several miles high) spaying of aluminum compounds (and maybe barium and strontium based compounds) in the grid patterns. This is called geoengineering. A representative of one of the rain enhancement companies said that this was being done with the objective of reducing global warming by creating a haze that reflects sunlight away from the earth. I am still unclear who is doing the geoengineering spraying. Is it the federal government as the rain enhancement rep said? Or is it privately funded? I have seen a video elsewhere of a former CIA director admitting it is being done. But if it is the feds, what federal entity is doing it? How much fed money is going to do it? When was it authorized, and for what purpose? After TDLR and the entities doing the cloud seeding in Texas (some of whom testified) visited Rep Virdell to tell him about the difference between weather mod/rain enhancement and geoengineering, claiming positive and benign effects of weather modification, Virdell changed his bill to target geoengineering being done instead of any regulated or funded by the state of Texas. The bill by Virdell had the votes to get out of committee and to the House floor, but Chair Dade Phelan (the former speaker of the Texas House and the chair of the committee in the video) refused to hold a vote, so the bill died. BTW, Kerrville is in Wes Virdell's district, and he has been out doing what he can to help in the response to the devastation of the flooding in his district. Note also that the testimony from citizens was primarily targeted at the health and environmental risks associated with spaying heavy metals and silver iodide over Texas. One of the rain production proponents claimed he has never seen a study that says that silver iodide for rain seeding is not safe. But I think I heard one of the witnesses saying that there are studies that are. But, boy, I still have a lot of questions. 1) How do we know that the Texas regulated rain enhancement program is not causing these freak rainstorms? I want to see a lot more science on this. I even think that the question about the enhancement of tornadic activity by cloud seeding that was asked has not been answered to my satisfaction. And I would VERY MUCH like to know if there was any cloud seeding activity that correlates with this most recent flooding episode. 2) Who is doing the geoengineering over Texas? How was it authorized? What chemicals are they using? What health and environmental studies have been done on whatever they are spaying? 3) What studies have been done on the impacts on weather (and rain production and tornadic impact) from the geoengineering going on that takes into account the combination of BOTH Texas weather mod activity AND geoengineering spraying? (This is kind of like asking whether there have ever been any safety studies on the combination of all the vaccines being recommended for children, nowadays. It is possible that one activity by itself does not do any harm, but a combination of multiple factors does.) I argued in the hearing that we need a stop to all of this until the people of Texas have had time to have input into what is being sprayed on them and what the health, environmental, and weather impacts are on them using unbiased, special-interest free studies. I still believe that. I hope that by reading info provided in this group, I will get a lot more answers to these questions. Thanks for letting me join.

Tom Glass

114,959 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🇦🇪🇸🇩 At the NYT DealBook Summit, former USAID head Samantha Power blamed waning student activism for the lack of pressure over the conflict in Sudan, suggesting young people today are preoccupied with things like personal insecurity, “whether they’ll have jobs,” and “affordability,” rather than mass atrocities. The remark was striking given the scale of student mobilization over the U.S.-Israeli genocide in Gaza during the Biden administration, when Power was overseeing humanitarian assistance during Israel’s illegal siege on two million Palestinians in Gaza. Power also sharply criticized the lack of accountability for the UAE despite extensive evidence linking Emirati backing to RSF atrocities in Sudan, including “mass rape” and ethnic cleansing. She called it “incoherent” for Washington, including the Biden administration, to pursue major strategic and AI partnerships with the UAE while it continues the slaughter in Sudan. She highlighted that the U.S. is failing to use available leverage, pointing to “elite and sports diplomacy” as pressure points that remain unused. She cited the NBA in particular, as the league has deep and expanding ties to the UAE. Emirates Airline is the NBA’s global airline partner and the title sponsor of the league’s in-season tournament, now branded the “Emirates NBA Cup,” with Emirates logos appearing on referee jerseys and across league marketing. The NBA has also hosted preseason games in Abu Dhabi for several consecutive years, part of a broader expansion strategy that includes partnerships with UAE-linked entities and teams like the New York Knicks. Human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, have warned these deals risk enabling “sportswashing,” allowing the UAE to polish its global image despite its key role in atrocities in Sudan. Sen. Chris Coons echoed the urgency, describing Sudan as a regional proxy war fueled by external powers, including the UAE and others, backing rival armed actors. He said the war will not end without “active U.S. engagement” to pressure those regional sponsors, and added that it was a “big mistake” to sign major business deals with UAE without conditioning them on ending support for the RSF. He also cautioned that U.S. cuts to humanitarian aid triggered a wider pullback by allies, leaving Sudan dangerously under-resourced amid the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
3:50

🇦🇪🇸🇩 At the NYT DealBook Summit, former USAID head Samantha Power blamed waning student activism for the lack of pressure over the conflict in Sudan, suggesting young people today are preoccupied with things like personal insecurity, “whether they’ll have jobs,” and “affordability,” rather than mass atrocities. The remark was striking given the scale of student mobilization over the U.S.-Israeli genocide in Gaza during the Biden administration, when Power was overseeing humanitarian assistance during Israel’s illegal siege on two million Palestinians in Gaza. Power also sharply criticized the lack of accountability for the UAE despite extensive evidence linking Emirati backing to RSF atrocities in Sudan, including “mass rape” and ethnic cleansing. She called it “incoherent” for Washington, including the Biden administration, to pursue major strategic and AI partnerships with the UAE while it continues the slaughter in Sudan. She highlighted that the U.S. is failing to use available leverage, pointing to “elite and sports diplomacy” as pressure points that remain unused. She cited the NBA in particular, as the league has deep and expanding ties to the UAE. Emirates Airline is the NBA’s global airline partner and the title sponsor of the league’s in-season tournament, now branded the “Emirates NBA Cup,” with Emirates logos appearing on referee jerseys and across league marketing. The NBA has also hosted preseason games in Abu Dhabi for several consecutive years, part of a broader expansion strategy that includes partnerships with UAE-linked entities and teams like the New York Knicks. Human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, have warned these deals risk enabling “sportswashing,” allowing the UAE to polish its global image despite its key role in atrocities in Sudan. Sen. Chris Coons echoed the urgency, describing Sudan as a regional proxy war fueled by external powers, including the UAE and others, backing rival armed actors. He said the war will not end without “active U.S. engagement” to pressure those regional sponsors, and added that it was a “big mistake” to sign major business deals with UAE without conditioning them on ending support for the RSF. He also cautioned that U.S. cuts to humanitarian aid triggered a wider pullback by allies, leaving Sudan dangerously under-resourced amid the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

Drop Site

88,116 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten