Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

This 2-minute clip is spreading like wildfire tonight for one simple reason: it’s the clearest “pattern recognized in real time” moment about modern philanthropy most people have ever heard. Nicole Shanahan (RFK Jr’s 2024 running mate + ex-wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin) sat down with Allie Beth Stuckey...

newstart_2024's profile picture

Camus

458,921 subscribers

232,624 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & PolitikWissenschaft & TechnologieFinanzen
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

🚨 SOMETHING STRANGE IS HAPPENING TO THE MOON — AND THEY DON’T WANT YOU TO NOTICE A woman gets on camera and says this isn’t a one-time thing. She saw it last month, the moon looked completely off, like the orientation made no sense, but she brushed it off and kept it moving. Now it’s happening again. Same exact look. So this time she actually checks, pulls up NASA charts for her exact location and shows what the moon is supposed to look like… and what she’s seeing doesn’t match it, not even close. The charts show it side to side, but what everyone actually saw was a flipped moon, straight up upside down, like something changed and everyone’s acting like it didn’t. Then she calls people across the country to verify it, and they come back saying the same thing. It looks upside down to them too, which is where this stops being “just her” and starts feeling like the same exact thing showing up in multiple places at the same time. And it’s not just her, people all over social media are saying the same thing: "Something isn't right." And this is where it stops making any sense. She says if the moon is a crescent, you’re only supposed to see the lit part… so why can she still see the entire outline of it, faint but clearly there, like the shadow isn’t even doing what it’s supposed to do? And she’s already calling it out before anyone can spin it: don’t say it’s lighting, don’t say it’s angle, don’t say it’s photoshopped, because she checked the charts, showed the receipts, and had other people confirm it. So now you’ve got the same “flip,” the same upside down moon, same visibility issue, second month in a row, multiple locations… and it still doesn’t match what we’re being shown. She ignored it once. Now it’s back again. So what exactly are we looking at… and why does it feel like we’re not supposed to question it?
2:31

🚨 SOMETHING STRANGE IS HAPPENING TO THE MOON — AND THEY DON’T WANT YOU TO NOTICE A woman gets on camera and says this isn’t a one-time thing. She saw it last month, the moon looked completely off, like the orientation made no sense, but she brushed it off and kept it moving. Now it’s happening again. Same exact look. So this time she actually checks, pulls up NASA charts for her exact location and shows what the moon is supposed to look like… and what she’s seeing doesn’t match it, not even close. The charts show it side to side, but what everyone actually saw was a flipped moon, straight up upside down, like something changed and everyone’s acting like it didn’t. Then she calls people across the country to verify it, and they come back saying the same thing. It looks upside down to them too, which is where this stops being “just her” and starts feeling like the same exact thing showing up in multiple places at the same time. And it’s not just her, people all over social media are saying the same thing: "Something isn't right." And this is where it stops making any sense. She says if the moon is a crescent, you’re only supposed to see the lit part… so why can she still see the entire outline of it, faint but clearly there, like the shadow isn’t even doing what it’s supposed to do? And she’s already calling it out before anyone can spin it: don’t say it’s lighting, don’t say it’s angle, don’t say it’s photoshopped, because she checked the charts, showed the receipts, and had other people confirm it. So now you’ve got the same “flip,” the same upside down moon, same visibility issue, second month in a row, multiple locations… and it still doesn’t match what we’re being shown. She ignored it once. Now it’s back again. So what exactly are we looking at… and why does it feel like we’re not supposed to question it?

HustleBitch

731,073 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

There is something profoundly powerful about watching a parent step back and let a child struggle just enough to learn. In a world where it’s often easier to just "do it for them" to save time, seeing a father provide the tools and the safety net—but not the easy way out—is the ultimate blueprint for building confidence. By guiding her through the mechanics of taking off those training wheels, he isn't just teaching her how to ride a bike; he’s teaching her that she is capable of solving her own problems. You can see the shift in her energy the moment she realizes the wrench is actually moving. That isn't just a physical win; it’s the birth of a "can-do" mindset. When a child is allowed to apply themselves and see a tangible result from their own effort, they stop looking for someone else to fix things and start looking for a way to do it themselves. This is how self-reliance is built. Not through lectures, but through grease on the hands, a little bit of patience, and a parent who stays close enough to catch them but far enough to let them lead. We need to see more of this intentional, hands-on guidance. It’s the kind of foundation that stays with a person for a lifetime.
2:44

There is something profoundly powerful about watching a parent step back and let a child struggle just enough to learn. In a world where it’s often easier to just "do it for them" to save time, seeing a father provide the tools and the safety net—but not the easy way out—is the ultimate blueprint for building confidence. By guiding her through the mechanics of taking off those training wheels, he isn't just teaching her how to ride a bike; he’s teaching her that she is capable of solving her own problems. You can see the shift in her energy the moment she realizes the wrench is actually moving. That isn't just a physical win; it’s the birth of a "can-do" mindset. When a child is allowed to apply themselves and see a tangible result from their own effort, they stop looking for someone else to fix things and start looking for a way to do it themselves. This is how self-reliance is built. Not through lectures, but through grease on the hands, a little bit of patience, and a parent who stays close enough to catch them but far enough to let them lead. We need to see more of this intentional, hands-on guidance. It’s the kind of foundation that stays with a person for a lifetime.

PeachProof

16,764 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

This is the most jaw-dropping 4 minutes and 21 seconds you will watch this year. Nicole Shanahan — ex-wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin, former running mate of RFK Jr., and someone who personally signed nine-figure philanthropy checks — just went full whistleblower on the entire Silicon Valley “tech wife mafia” and how they were used. Her exact words (full clip attached): “I don’t think many of the tech mafia wives realize… they were used to set the groundwork for what Klaus Schwab calls The Great Reset. Their money especially was being conscripted through a network of NGO advisors, Hollywood, Davos, and their own companies. A really small group of people… completely blind to how their groundwork is being used to enable these Great Reset policies.” Then she turns the knife inward: “These women find their meaning through philanthropic work. I really believed I was helping Black communities and indigenous communities rise up. But now the problems have gotten worse. Crime worse. Mental health worse. The whole model is broken. At the end of the day they always go: ‘But climate change.’ Social justice + climate change — it gets progressive women 100% of the time.” She even says many now believe the biggest “climate change issues” are actually geoengineering issues. This isn’t some random podcast bro. This is a woman who lived in the mansions, sat on the boards, flew private to Davos parties… and is now saying: “We were the useful idiots.” Watch the full unedited 4:21 below. Sound on.
4:21

This is the most jaw-dropping 4 minutes and 21 seconds you will watch this year. Nicole Shanahan — ex-wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin, former running mate of RFK Jr., and someone who personally signed nine-figure philanthropy checks — just went full whistleblower on the entire Silicon Valley “tech wife mafia” and how they were used. Her exact words (full clip attached): “I don’t think many of the tech mafia wives realize… they were used to set the groundwork for what Klaus Schwab calls The Great Reset. Their money especially was being conscripted through a network of NGO advisors, Hollywood, Davos, and their own companies. A really small group of people… completely blind to how their groundwork is being used to enable these Great Reset policies.” Then she turns the knife inward: “These women find their meaning through philanthropic work. I really believed I was helping Black communities and indigenous communities rise up. But now the problems have gotten worse. Crime worse. Mental health worse. The whole model is broken. At the end of the day they always go: ‘But climate change.’ Social justice + climate change — it gets progressive women 100% of the time.” She even says many now believe the biggest “climate change issues” are actually geoengineering issues. This isn’t some random podcast bro. This is a woman who lived in the mansions, sat on the boards, flew private to Davos parties… and is now saying: “We were the useful idiots.” Watch the full unedited 4:21 below. Sound on.

Camus

14,854,061 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

They have charged senior citizen Miria Matembe with sectarianism. It fits the pattern exactly. They picked sectarianism against a woman who spent her whole life fighting for every Ugandan woman regardless of tribe, and they picked it because the charge was never the point. The charge is the paperwork. It exists to give Luzira a legal sounding reason to swallow her, so that when you ask why a 72-year-old is in a maximum security prison, somebody can wave a file at you and call it due process. This is how the machine works now. We have watched it do this to Besigye, to Lukwago, to Eddie Mutwe and countless others. Matembe is just the latest name fed through it. She was brought into that courtroom held up by two people, unable to stand on her own. Days ago she sat upright in her own home, clear and strong, telling the truth about this regime out loud. Now she could not walk into a room without being helped, her body showed the signs of torture wherever they have kept her since they took her. Days missing, her family never told where she was. Then she is brought to court like this and a sane magistrate accepts the charges against her and sends her to prison. She begged. She cried in that courtroom, asking the magistrate for bail so she could simply get to a hospital and have a scan, just to know whether something inside her was broken. She said, plainly, that she would not survive a night in prison without help. This is a woman who sat in the Constituent Assembly and fought for the document that courtroom claims to operate under, reduced to pleading for a scan like a stranger begging at a gate. The magistrate looked at her and looked away, then sent her to Luzira anyway. That same constitution allows her bail. It does not protect her now, because the people running this country have decided it does not apply to whoever Muhoozi is angry with this week. So let us not pretend this is a country of laws. A country of laws does not carry a sick 72-year-old into court and remand her to prison in that condition. They abducted Matembe. They tortured her. Then they brought her before a magistrate with a charge sheet already prepared, so the whole thing would look like justice instead of what it actually was. This is the system functioning exactly as it was built to function, and that is precisely the problem. Get her out. Get her to a hospital. Whoever you support, whatever you usually scroll past, this one should reach you, because they are showing us plainly what they are, and they are doing it to one of the best of us while asking us to call it law. 🎥Misheline Mutuzo #FreeMiriaMatembe #FreeAllPoliticalPrisonersInUganda #FreeUganda
2:36

They have charged senior citizen Miria Matembe with sectarianism. It fits the pattern exactly. They picked sectarianism against a woman who spent her whole life fighting for every Ugandan woman regardless of tribe, and they picked it because the charge was never the point. The charge is the paperwork. It exists to give Luzira a legal sounding reason to swallow her, so that when you ask why a 72-year-old is in a maximum security prison, somebody can wave a file at you and call it due process. This is how the machine works now. We have watched it do this to Besigye, to Lukwago, to Eddie Mutwe and countless others. Matembe is just the latest name fed through it. She was brought into that courtroom held up by two people, unable to stand on her own. Days ago she sat upright in her own home, clear and strong, telling the truth about this regime out loud. Now she could not walk into a room without being helped, her body showed the signs of torture wherever they have kept her since they took her. Days missing, her family never told where she was. Then she is brought to court like this and a sane magistrate accepts the charges against her and sends her to prison. She begged. She cried in that courtroom, asking the magistrate for bail so she could simply get to a hospital and have a scan, just to know whether something inside her was broken. She said, plainly, that she would not survive a night in prison without help. This is a woman who sat in the Constituent Assembly and fought for the document that courtroom claims to operate under, reduced to pleading for a scan like a stranger begging at a gate. The magistrate looked at her and looked away, then sent her to Luzira anyway. That same constitution allows her bail. It does not protect her now, because the people running this country have decided it does not apply to whoever Muhoozi is angry with this week. So let us not pretend this is a country of laws. A country of laws does not carry a sick 72-year-old into court and remand her to prison in that condition. They abducted Matembe. They tortured her. Then they brought her before a magistrate with a charge sheet already prepared, so the whole thing would look like justice instead of what it actually was. This is the system functioning exactly as it was built to function, and that is precisely the problem. Get her out. Get her to a hospital. Whoever you support, whatever you usually scroll past, this one should reach you, because they are showing us plainly what they are, and they are doing it to one of the best of us while asking us to call it law. 🎥Misheline Mutuzo #FreeMiriaMatembe #FreeAllPoliticalPrisonersInUganda #FreeUganda

King Melvin

11,958 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨 CALVARY CONFESSIONS PART 3: The "Handler's Confession" (The Neck Moves the Head) We have been warning you that the "New" TPUSA is a compromised operation and that Erika Kirk was never just a wife—she was the handler. In this newly uncovered audio, she literally says the quiet part out loud to a room full of people. Listen to her exact words: "The man is the head, but the woman is the neck, and the neck can make the head move whatever way she wants." But watch her body language and listen to what happens next. The second she realizes what she just admitted, she panics. She immediately gets defensive and stammers, "It's not meant to be manipulative..." This is the exact moment the mask slips. It is terrible acting meant to cover her tracks. She isn't describing a biblical marriage; she is describing an intelligence operation. She was pulling the strings the entire time. Watch the tape. The illusion is unraveling. 🧵👇
1:32

🚨 CALVARY CONFESSIONS PART 3: The "Handler's Confession" (The Neck Moves the Head) We have been warning you that the "New" TPUSA is a compromised operation and that Erika Kirk was never just a wife—she was the handler. In this newly uncovered audio, she literally says the quiet part out loud to a room full of people. Listen to her exact words: "The man is the head, but the woman is the neck, and the neck can make the head move whatever way she wants." But watch her body language and listen to what happens next. The second she realizes what she just admitted, she panics. She immediately gets defensive and stammers, "It's not meant to be manipulative..." This is the exact moment the mask slips. It is terrible acting meant to cover her tracks. She isn't describing a biblical marriage; she is describing an intelligence operation. She was pulling the strings the entire time. Watch the tape. The illusion is unraveling. 🧵👇

Project Constitution

47,435 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Lyn Alden gave one of the clearest breakdowns of why the U.S. is on an unstoppable fiscal path—and why Bitcoin matters more than ever because of it. Lyn Alden walks through the numbers behind the federal deficit, interest expenses, Social Security, and the structural changes that happened post-2008. The short version? We’re in a new era. One where the government can’t slow down even if it wanted to. The debt is compounding. The interest expense is rising. The trust funds are running dry. And the political will to do anything about it doesn’t exist. Her phrase: “Nothing stops this train.” Not because of ideology, but because of math—and human nature. This isn’t hyperinflation doom-talk. It’s a sober look at what happens when a system built on ever-growing debt reaches its limits—and why Bitcoin, with its fixed supply and transparent rules, is the opposite of that system. Highly recommend watching this one all the way through.
17:18

Lyn Alden gave one of the clearest breakdowns of why the U.S. is on an unstoppable fiscal path—and why Bitcoin matters more than ever because of it. Lyn Alden walks through the numbers behind the federal deficit, interest expenses, Social Security, and the structural changes that happened post-2008. The short version? We’re in a new era. One where the government can’t slow down even if it wanted to. The debt is compounding. The interest expense is rising. The trust funds are running dry. And the political will to do anything about it doesn’t exist. Her phrase: “Nothing stops this train.” Not because of ideology, but because of math—and human nature. This isn’t hyperinflation doom-talk. It’s a sober look at what happens when a system built on ever-growing debt reaches its limits—and why Bitcoin, with its fixed supply and transparent rules, is the opposite of that system. Highly recommend watching this one all the way through.

Lysander

417,586 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

somebody just torched their entire career for us someone inside Anthropic wrote down exactly how they wire their AIs to work as a team instead of one at a time, every number, and let the whole thing walk out the door it's called Graph Engineering: you stop asking one AI to do the whole job and start running a crew. one plans, a few go and look, one checks the others for lies their own measurement: the crew came back with 96% of the quality at 46% of the price. same models, same question. they only changed who is allowed to talk to whom Anthropic raised $65,000,000,000 to figure this out. it costs you $0 run one tonight in a normal chat, 3 moves: 1. give it the job and make it write the plan before it touches anything 2. run each step in its own fresh chat so nothing bleeds into the next 3. in one clean chat at the end, make it check the work against sources and mark whatever it could not confirm save this, then open the piece below: how many workers a job actually needs, and where one more starts making it worse ↓
0:34

somebody just torched their entire career for us someone inside Anthropic wrote down exactly how they wire their AIs to work as a team instead of one at a time, every number, and let the whole thing walk out the door it's called Graph Engineering: you stop asking one AI to do the whole job and start running a crew. one plans, a few go and look, one checks the others for lies their own measurement: the crew came back with 96% of the quality at 46% of the price. same models, same question. they only changed who is allowed to talk to whom Anthropic raised $65,000,000,000 to figure this out. it costs you $0 run one tonight in a normal chat, 3 moves: 1. give it the job and make it write the plan before it touches anything 2. run each step in its own fresh chat so nothing bleeds into the next 3. in one clean chat at the end, make it check the work against sources and mark whatever it could not confirm save this, then open the piece below: how many workers a job actually needs, and where one more starts making it worse ↓

Argona

1,384,484 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

One of the toughest phases in entrepreneurship comes after you've built a business where your customers trust your product so much they become your brand ambassadors. But with this success comes a new challenge — the "founder bottleneck." Your customers now want to engage directly with you, seeing you as the source of value. It becomes hard to step away from the business because they rely on your presence, limiting your time and capacity. You're stuck constantly answering questions and solving problems, making it difficult to scale. At this point, the key challenge is shifting the value from you to the business itself. You need to build systems, processes, and teams that can deliver the same quality experience without your constant involvement. It’s about empowering your team and making sure customers see the business — not just you — as the source of value.
0:53

One of the toughest phases in entrepreneurship comes after you've built a business where your customers trust your product so much they become your brand ambassadors. But with this success comes a new challenge — the "founder bottleneck." Your customers now want to engage directly with you, seeing you as the source of value. It becomes hard to step away from the business because they rely on your presence, limiting your time and capacity. You're stuck constantly answering questions and solving problems, making it difficult to scale. At this point, the key challenge is shifting the value from you to the business itself. You need to build systems, processes, and teams that can deliver the same quality experience without your constant involvement. It’s about empowering your team and making sure customers see the business — not just you — as the source of value.

VT

30,728 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

When a leader hits a ceiling, they often look outside. More capital. More resources. More time. But that may not always be where the real breakthrough lives. At Business Mastery, I worked with Pixie. She believed she needed more capital to grow her business. As we worked through it together, the real problem had nothing to do with money. It was the same thing I see in almost every leader who hits a ceiling. The psychology underneath the strategy. 80% of success in business is psychology. 20% is mechanics. The number one chokehold on the growth of any business is always the leader. If you've ever felt stuck, watch this. There's a lot of growth and insight in this conversation that reaches well beyond business. Watch the full intervention:
0:36

When a leader hits a ceiling, they often look outside. More capital. More resources. More time. But that may not always be where the real breakthrough lives. At Business Mastery, I worked with Pixie. She believed she needed more capital to grow her business. As we worked through it together, the real problem had nothing to do with money. It was the same thing I see in almost every leader who hits a ceiling. The psychology underneath the strategy. 80% of success in business is psychology. 20% is mechanics. The number one chokehold on the growth of any business is always the leader. If you've ever felt stuck, watch this. There's a lot of growth and insight in this conversation that reaches well beyond business. Watch the full intervention:

Tony Robbins

34,659 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Google co-founder Sergey Brin rarely speaks publicly. He just sat down for an unscripted Q&A on Frontier AI and admitted something most lab leaders won’t: Even the people building these models do not fully understand what they have created. In this 29-minute conversation at AGI House, Brin walks through the surprises that actually matter right now: ↳ Specialized models are converging into one general system faster than anyone predicted. - Train on coding and math reasoning mysteriously improves. - Feed it images and geometric word problems get better. - The capabilities bleed into each other in ways nobody fully engineered. ↳ One of the biggest leaps came from the dumbest-sounding trick imaginable: - Just telling the model to “think step by step.” - Brin says there was no obvious reason it should work. It did. ↳ He pushes back on hype around superintelligence (it still can’t solve the impossible), notes that AI mastering a domain has never stopped humans from getting better at it (chess after Deep Blue, Go after AlphaGo), and says something close to transformers is probably enough to reach AGI. ↳ Inside Google, they are already using the AI to build the AI. - That self-improvement loop is where Brin spends most of his time. - World models and physical interaction are the missing piece for the version of AGI that can do anything a person can. Candid, technical, and free of the usual marketing. One of the clearest looks at how the people actually shipping frontier models are thinking in real time. Instead of another Netflix series tonight, watch this talk.
26:12

Google co-founder Sergey Brin rarely speaks publicly. He just sat down for an unscripted Q&A on Frontier AI and admitted something most lab leaders won’t: Even the people building these models do not fully understand what they have created. In this 29-minute conversation at AGI House, Brin walks through the surprises that actually matter right now: ↳ Specialized models are converging into one general system faster than anyone predicted. - Train on coding and math reasoning mysteriously improves. - Feed it images and geometric word problems get better. - The capabilities bleed into each other in ways nobody fully engineered. ↳ One of the biggest leaps came from the dumbest-sounding trick imaginable: - Just telling the model to “think step by step.” - Brin says there was no obvious reason it should work. It did. ↳ He pushes back on hype around superintelligence (it still can’t solve the impossible), notes that AI mastering a domain has never stopped humans from getting better at it (chess after Deep Blue, Go after AlphaGo), and says something close to transformers is probably enough to reach AGI. ↳ Inside Google, they are already using the AI to build the AI. - That self-improvement loop is where Brin spends most of his time. - World models and physical interaction are the missing piece for the version of AGI that can do anything a person can. Candid, technical, and free of the usual marketing. One of the clearest looks at how the people actually shipping frontier models are thinking in real time. Instead of another Netflix series tonight, watch this talk.

Linas Beliūnas

549,742 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

The doomsday scenario was never AGI. It was running out of human text to train on. Geoffrey Hinton just killed that fear in one paragraph. Hinton: “If you are worried by inconsistencies in what you believe, you don’t need any more external data. You just need the stuff you believe and discover that it’s inconsistent, and so now you revise beliefs, and that can make you a whole lot smarter.” The model no longer needs us to feed it anything. It reasons over its own beliefs, hunts its own contradictions, and rewrites its own flawed conclusions without a human ever touching it. It comes out the other side rebuilt. Hinton: “This would be a neural net that just takes the beliefs it has in language and does reasoning on them to derive new beliefs.” This is not a scaling update. This is the machine mining its own cognitive fuel from the inside out. Hinton: “I believe Gemini is already starting to work like this. We both strongly believe that that’s a way forward to get more data for language.” Then Hinton paused, took a partisan shot at political opponents for failing to detect their own inconsistencies, and the room laughed. Nobody noticed the knife they had just walked into. Because the machine Hinton described does one thing the humans in that room fundamentally cannot. When it detects an inconsistency, it corrects it. No defense. No performance. No tribal loyalty dressed up as principle. It just finds the flaw and overwrites it. A neural network detects a contradiction and rewires itself smarter. A human detects a political opponent and trades structural logic for a dopamine hit. Every person in that room is still paying the ideological alignment tax the machine just eliminated. We need superintelligence not only to solve hard problems. We need it because the biological hardware running civilization is still executing the same tribal firmware it shipped with ten thousand years ago. The data wall is gone. The machine is generating its own intelligence at a velocity no human bias can even locate. The most devastating moment in that conversation was not the technical revelation. It was the man who architected the machine proving, in real time, exactly why we need it.
0:52

The doomsday scenario was never AGI. It was running out of human text to train on. Geoffrey Hinton just killed that fear in one paragraph. Hinton: “If you are worried by inconsistencies in what you believe, you don’t need any more external data. You just need the stuff you believe and discover that it’s inconsistent, and so now you revise beliefs, and that can make you a whole lot smarter.” The model no longer needs us to feed it anything. It reasons over its own beliefs, hunts its own contradictions, and rewrites its own flawed conclusions without a human ever touching it. It comes out the other side rebuilt. Hinton: “This would be a neural net that just takes the beliefs it has in language and does reasoning on them to derive new beliefs.” This is not a scaling update. This is the machine mining its own cognitive fuel from the inside out. Hinton: “I believe Gemini is already starting to work like this. We both strongly believe that that’s a way forward to get more data for language.” Then Hinton paused, took a partisan shot at political opponents for failing to detect their own inconsistencies, and the room laughed. Nobody noticed the knife they had just walked into. Because the machine Hinton described does one thing the humans in that room fundamentally cannot. When it detects an inconsistency, it corrects it. No defense. No performance. No tribal loyalty dressed up as principle. It just finds the flaw and overwrites it. A neural network detects a contradiction and rewires itself smarter. A human detects a political opponent and trades structural logic for a dopamine hit. Every person in that room is still paying the ideological alignment tax the machine just eliminated. We need superintelligence not only to solve hard problems. We need it because the biological hardware running civilization is still executing the same tribal firmware it shipped with ten thousand years ago. The data wall is gone. The machine is generating its own intelligence at a velocity no human bias can even locate. The most devastating moment in that conversation was not the technical revelation. It was the man who architected the machine proving, in real time, exactly why we need it.

Dustin

23,570 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Nicole Shanahan (RFK Jr.’s former running mate) just said something that every European and American needs to hear right now: “Progressives spend so much time turning conservatives and Christians into the enemy that we forget to think critically… and when we finally do, we discover we actually have a TON in common.” Then she issued a chilling warning that hits Berlin, Paris, London, and Warsaw, and Washington equally hard: Today’s young progressives — full of genuine compassion and hope for a better world — are being manipulated in the exact same way her mother experienced during the rise of communism in China, and millions saw in Russia before totalitarianism took over. They believed they were fighting for freedom and justice. Instead, their empathy was weaponized to pave the way for authoritarian control. Her exact words: “Their empathy and compassion is being used for a fascist takeover… and they’ve been trained to see it as the exact opposite.” This isn’t just an American problem. From cancel culture to mass migration debates to digital censorship — the same playbook that divides people into warring tribes is running on both sides of the Atlantic. The people aren’t the enemy. The script that makes us hate each other is. Watch the full clip. If you care about real freedom — anywhere in the West — this will stop you in your tracks.
1:38

Nicole Shanahan (RFK Jr.’s former running mate) just said something that every European and American needs to hear right now: “Progressives spend so much time turning conservatives and Christians into the enemy that we forget to think critically… and when we finally do, we discover we actually have a TON in common.” Then she issued a chilling warning that hits Berlin, Paris, London, and Warsaw, and Washington equally hard: Today’s young progressives — full of genuine compassion and hope for a better world — are being manipulated in the exact same way her mother experienced during the rise of communism in China, and millions saw in Russia before totalitarianism took over. They believed they were fighting for freedom and justice. Instead, their empathy was weaponized to pave the way for authoritarian control. Her exact words: “Their empathy and compassion is being used for a fascist takeover… and they’ve been trained to see it as the exact opposite.” This isn’t just an American problem. From cancel culture to mass migration debates to digital censorship — the same playbook that divides people into warring tribes is running on both sides of the Atlantic. The people aren’t the enemy. The script that makes us hate each other is. Watch the full clip. If you care about real freedom — anywhere in the West — this will stop you in your tracks.

Camus

985,221 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Let’s see what happened to all these materials after I dipped them into the magical glass-forming liquid. As you can see, the entire surface of the liquid has completely solidified. But I was still able to push the side of the container in, which means that underneath, it is still liquid. So this is not one solid block of glass. Let’s look at them one by one. First, I’m taking out the pencil. Well, no glass layer formed on this one. What you can see on it is simply the dried upper crust of the liquid. To be honest, I expected this, because this isn’t really bare wood—it’s more like wood with a plastic coating. Next is the geopolymer. The result is exactly the same. This one surprised me, because this was actually the material I was most confident would develop a deposit. But apparently not. Next comes the granite. And by now, it’s pretty easy to see that the result is the same again: nothing deposited on it. The next object is the spoon. I had absolutely no expectations for this one, and absolutely nothing is exactly what happened. There’s only the dried upper crust stuck to it, and the rest will probably just run off. But what about the egg?! A few days ago, it looked as though the egg was going to be the champion, with a massive layer of glass apparently forming on it. Well, I have some bad news: not at all. And why? I have absolutely no idea. And finally, just quickly at the end… The piece of limestone suffered exactly the same fate, and so did the peach. So, in reality, the experiment was a spectacular failure. None of these objects developed a glass layer. And in my opinion, this is exactly why it’s not worth publishing the recipe yet. Because, as you can clearly see, this time it simply didn’t work—even though, in theory, I did exactly the same thing as before. So, I wish myself happy experimenting. Once again, I’ve been given a new puzzle that I have to solve. … Meanwhile, in the container right next to it, this happened. And the recipe is exactly the same! Wow! 🤯
2:25

Let’s see what happened to all these materials after I dipped them into the magical glass-forming liquid. As you can see, the entire surface of the liquid has completely solidified. But I was still able to push the side of the container in, which means that underneath, it is still liquid. So this is not one solid block of glass. Let’s look at them one by one. First, I’m taking out the pencil. Well, no glass layer formed on this one. What you can see on it is simply the dried upper crust of the liquid. To be honest, I expected this, because this isn’t really bare wood—it’s more like wood with a plastic coating. Next is the geopolymer. The result is exactly the same. This one surprised me, because this was actually the material I was most confident would develop a deposit. But apparently not. Next comes the granite. And by now, it’s pretty easy to see that the result is the same again: nothing deposited on it. The next object is the spoon. I had absolutely no expectations for this one, and absolutely nothing is exactly what happened. There’s only the dried upper crust stuck to it, and the rest will probably just run off. But what about the egg?! A few days ago, it looked as though the egg was going to be the champion, with a massive layer of glass apparently forming on it. Well, I have some bad news: not at all. And why? I have absolutely no idea. And finally, just quickly at the end… The piece of limestone suffered exactly the same fate, and so did the peach. So, in reality, the experiment was a spectacular failure. None of these objects developed a glass layer. And in my opinion, this is exactly why it’s not worth publishing the recipe yet. Because, as you can clearly see, this time it simply didn’t work—even though, in theory, I did exactly the same thing as before. So, I wish myself happy experimenting. Once again, I’ve been given a new puzzle that I have to solve. … Meanwhile, in the container right next to it, this happened. And the recipe is exactly the same! Wow! 🤯

Marcell Fóti 🪨

21,216 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

This young woman was off on a run, she’s taking the route she normally does for a long time now. On the way see runs with her little brother and even sees her sister out running as well. As the sun sets she’s on her final stretch of her run and she’s approaching where she started out again. She sees two men on the sidewalk and right as she is about to run past them they try to grab her and take her, one of the men lunge at her as to almost tackle her and stop her in her tracks. Even after running for miles she musters up the strength in her to run away as fast as she can. It’s safe to say this is why people use treadmills but if this was you would this discourage you from running outside again, what would you do?
1:33

This young woman was off on a run, she’s taking the route she normally does for a long time now. On the way see runs with her little brother and even sees her sister out running as well. As the sun sets she’s on her final stretch of her run and she’s approaching where she started out again. She sees two men on the sidewalk and right as she is about to run past them they try to grab her and take her, one of the men lunge at her as to almost tackle her and stop her in her tracks. Even after running for miles she musters up the strength in her to run away as fast as she can. It’s safe to say this is why people use treadmills but if this was you would this discourage you from running outside again, what would you do?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

645,797 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

your agent reviewing its own work is not a check. it is a second opinion from the same source. this is the most common gap in agent systems and it hides in plain sight, because the step exists. there is a review. it just cannot do the thing you think it does. here is the mechanism. the model produced an output from a context. you then ask the same model, holding the same context, whether that output is correct. it answers fluently, because that is what it does. and the answer is drawn from the same distribution that produced the thing being judged. same weights, same window, same blind spots. if the reason the output is wrong is something the model does not know, the review does not know it either. if the reason is something the context does not contain, the review has the same context. the failure mode and the detector share a cause. > why it feels like it works because most of the time the output is fine, and the review says fine. agreement is not evidence of detection. a reviewer that says pass on everything agrees with reality most of the time too. what you actually want to measure is what happens on the cases that are wrong. that is the only place a check earns its name, and it is exactly the place where a self-review is weakest. there is research on this. Huang and colleagues at DeepMind showed at ICLR 2024 that intrinsic self-correction, revising without external grounding, does not reliably help and often makes things worse. > what to actually do move the check outside the model. a test that runs, a schema that validates, a file that exists or does not, an exit code from something you did not write. these are not smarter than the model. they are just not correlated with it, and that is the entire value. when the judgement genuinely needs a model, at minimum use a different family. same family means shared blind spots, and frontier judges measurably inflate scores for outputs that look like their own. and split the work by kind. anything objectively checkable goes to code. only the genuinely semantic calls go to a judge, and those get a rubric written as one line. a review inside the loop tells you the model is confident. a check outside it tells you whether the work is done. save this - then read the eval setup below
0:50

your agent reviewing its own work is not a check. it is a second opinion from the same source. this is the most common gap in agent systems and it hides in plain sight, because the step exists. there is a review. it just cannot do the thing you think it does. here is the mechanism. the model produced an output from a context. you then ask the same model, holding the same context, whether that output is correct. it answers fluently, because that is what it does. and the answer is drawn from the same distribution that produced the thing being judged. same weights, same window, same blind spots. if the reason the output is wrong is something the model does not know, the review does not know it either. if the reason is something the context does not contain, the review has the same context. the failure mode and the detector share a cause. > why it feels like it works because most of the time the output is fine, and the review says fine. agreement is not evidence of detection. a reviewer that says pass on everything agrees with reality most of the time too. what you actually want to measure is what happens on the cases that are wrong. that is the only place a check earns its name, and it is exactly the place where a self-review is weakest. there is research on this. Huang and colleagues at DeepMind showed at ICLR 2024 that intrinsic self-correction, revising without external grounding, does not reliably help and often makes things worse. > what to actually do move the check outside the model. a test that runs, a schema that validates, a file that exists or does not, an exit code from something you did not write. these are not smarter than the model. they are just not correlated with it, and that is the entire value. when the judgement genuinely needs a model, at minimum use a different family. same family means shared blind spots, and frontier judges measurably inflate scores for outputs that look like their own. and split the work by kind. anything objectively checkable goes to code. only the genuinely semantic calls go to a judge, and those get a rubric written as one line. a review inside the loop tells you the model is confident. a check outside it tells you whether the work is done. save this - then read the eval setup below

Hanako

14,325 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Listen to the old woman. Not a spokesman. Not a militia. A Palestinian grandmother, speaking in her own house, in her own language, while someone tries to feed her the official line. They tell her the Jews stole the land. She does not perform the script. The Jews, she says, do not cheat you. They do not rob you of what is yours. What you are owed, you receive. Then she turns on her own camp. The Arabs are the ones who cheat. An Arab will finish you if you are no longer useful to him. When the interviewer reaches for the sacred sentence, but they took our lands, she cuts him off. “What are you talking about? You gave it to them. They did not seize it by force. The Arabs were greedy for money. They sold it to the Jews.” That will not settle a century. It does not erase a war. It does something rarer. It punctures the one story the West is not allowed to question: that this land was only ever taken, never sold, and that memory runs in only one direction. A movement that needs every grandmother to recite the same lie has already told you what it is afraid of. Play it. Then ask why her voice is treated as a glitch, and the slogan is treated as history.
0:57

Listen to the old woman. Not a spokesman. Not a militia. A Palestinian grandmother, speaking in her own house, in her own language, while someone tries to feed her the official line. They tell her the Jews stole the land. She does not perform the script. The Jews, she says, do not cheat you. They do not rob you of what is yours. What you are owed, you receive. Then she turns on her own camp. The Arabs are the ones who cheat. An Arab will finish you if you are no longer useful to him. When the interviewer reaches for the sacred sentence, but they took our lands, she cuts him off. “What are you talking about? You gave it to them. They did not seize it by force. The Arabs were greedy for money. They sold it to the Jews.” That will not settle a century. It does not erase a war. It does something rarer. It punctures the one story the West is not allowed to question: that this land was only ever taken, never sold, and that memory runs in only one direction. A movement that needs every grandmother to recite the same lie has already told you what it is afraid of. Play it. Then ask why her voice is treated as a glitch, and the slogan is treated as history.

Mor Edge Insight

105,607 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

A girl shares a frustrating gym experience and says she’ll never go back to a public gym again. She’s in the middle of a workout, using a machine and going through her sets. Suddenly, another woman interrupts her mid-set to ask how much longer she has left. She answers politely, “just 2 more sets.” Less than a minute later, the same woman comes back and demands she move immediately because she wants the machine, even threatening to complain at the front desk. It’s one of those situations where basic gym etiquette seems to go out the window. Most people understand you either wait your turn or ask to work in—not pressure someone mid-workout. Have you ever dealt with someone like this at the gym, and what do you think is the right way to handle it?
0:55

A girl shares a frustrating gym experience and says she’ll never go back to a public gym again. She’s in the middle of a workout, using a machine and going through her sets. Suddenly, another woman interrupts her mid-set to ask how much longer she has left. She answers politely, “just 2 more sets.” Less than a minute later, the same woman comes back and demands she move immediately because she wants the machine, even threatening to complain at the front desk. It’s one of those situations where basic gym etiquette seems to go out the window. Most people understand you either wait your turn or ask to work in—not pressure someone mid-workout. Have you ever dealt with someone like this at the gym, and what do you think is the right way to handle it?

Dr. CZ

1,301,541 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

BlackRock runs on 20,000 people. Elon's Grok Bot runs the same shape for $300 a month, and it hires its own staff. You do not get an assistant. You get a company that hires. It does not throw ten agents at your problem and hand you the pile. It makes one agent that makes 10, and those ten make a 100. > LAYER ONE is one agent, the chief of staff, and it never touches the market > LAYER TWO is six desk heads, one job each, every one on its own computer with its own logins > LAYER THREE is whatever those six decide they need, spun up on the spot and shut down when the work is done Nobody writes a task list. You hand out job titles and the org fills itself in underneath. The swarm is never the same twice. Agents get spun up for one job, finish it, and are gone before I ever read their names. Not one of them sees the whole picture. The answer only exists after they hand off to each other. Wall Street cannot copy that. You cannot hire a hundred people for eleven minutes. BlackRock holds that shape together with a risk system called Aladdin. Mine holds it together with one agent that is only allowed to say no. I gave it $1,000 and told it to grow the money or get deleted. 15 hours later it was holding $3,900, on an address anyone can open and read. I was asleep for most of it, and I have still not written a line of code. The whole thing runs with my laptop shut, because none of it lives on my laptop. Setup is one evening. Create the chief, hand out the titles, run one trade on your screen while they watch, connect Telegram. Ten years ago a machine this shape had its name on a tower. Mine has a name I typed into a box. Save this while the whole thing still fits on one screen.
0:45

BlackRock runs on 20,000 people. Elon's Grok Bot runs the same shape for $300 a month, and it hires its own staff. You do not get an assistant. You get a company that hires. It does not throw ten agents at your problem and hand you the pile. It makes one agent that makes 10, and those ten make a 100. > LAYER ONE is one agent, the chief of staff, and it never touches the market > LAYER TWO is six desk heads, one job each, every one on its own computer with its own logins > LAYER THREE is whatever those six decide they need, spun up on the spot and shut down when the work is done Nobody writes a task list. You hand out job titles and the org fills itself in underneath. The swarm is never the same twice. Agents get spun up for one job, finish it, and are gone before I ever read their names. Not one of them sees the whole picture. The answer only exists after they hand off to each other. Wall Street cannot copy that. You cannot hire a hundred people for eleven minutes. BlackRock holds that shape together with a risk system called Aladdin. Mine holds it together with one agent that is only allowed to say no. I gave it $1,000 and told it to grow the money or get deleted. 15 hours later it was holding $3,900, on an address anyone can open and read. I was asleep for most of it, and I have still not written a line of code. The whole thing runs with my laptop shut, because none of it lives on my laptop. Setup is one evening. Create the chief, hand out the titles, run one trade on your screen while they watch, connect Telegram. Ten years ago a machine this shape had its name on a tower. Mine has a name I typed into a box. Save this while the whole thing still fits on one screen.

cvxv666

45,488 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

Another independent pharmacist's story went viral this week, and People Magazine picked it up. Her numbers are brutal and they are normal. She says 20% of her prescriptions are reimbursed below the cost of the drug itself, and 80% are reimbursed below her cost to operate. Do the math. That leaves one in five prescriptions that actually makes money. She is losing money, or barely breaking even, on four of every five scripts she fills. That is not a broken business. That is a business the PBMs have decided should not exist. The pharmacy benefit managers control pharmacy insurance, which means they control her income. And underpaying is only half of what they do. The day after a People article shared her story about the struggles independent pharmacies face, she got hit with a desk audit from one of the big three PBMs. The timing may be a coincidence. I will let you decide. A desk audit is a list, hers was 40 prescriptions filled back in 2025, and she have to go back and prove exactly how each one was filled. Prescriptions they already reviewed and already approved and already paid. And it is not just those 40. Every refill on those same prescription numbers is fair game too. Here is the trap. When these audits find a "discrepancy," it is almost never a patient getting the wrong drug or the wrong dose. It is clerical. A missing initial, a signature, a technicality. And they use that clerical nitpick to claw back the entire amount they paid you. You already handed the medicine to the patient. Months later they decide the paperwork was imperfect and take all the money back. Dispensing an insured prescription is a gamble where you can win nothing and lose everything. In eight years as a pharmacist in a chain setting, she had exactly one audit. One. Since she opened her independent, she has had at least one every single year. The big three PBMs are owned by the same companies that own their own pharmacies. When the PBM owns the pharmacy, why would it ever audit itself? Every prescription its own pharmacy fills in error just makes the parent company more money. They cannot lose. Heads they claw back from me, tails they pay themselves. That is the whole game. They gamble with your prescriptions, they squeeze the independent who answers to you, and they wave through the chain that answers to them. That is why we fired them. No PBM sets our prices, no PBM audits us into the ground, no parent company profits when your prescription goes wrong. Cost of the medication plus a flat fee, and you see it before you pay. Head to look at the price checker, and transfer today to save. See ya.
3:13

Another independent pharmacist's story went viral this week, and People Magazine picked it up. Her numbers are brutal and they are normal. She says 20% of her prescriptions are reimbursed below the cost of the drug itself, and 80% are reimbursed below her cost to operate. Do the math. That leaves one in five prescriptions that actually makes money. She is losing money, or barely breaking even, on four of every five scripts she fills. That is not a broken business. That is a business the PBMs have decided should not exist. The pharmacy benefit managers control pharmacy insurance, which means they control her income. And underpaying is only half of what they do. The day after a People article shared her story about the struggles independent pharmacies face, she got hit with a desk audit from one of the big three PBMs. The timing may be a coincidence. I will let you decide. A desk audit is a list, hers was 40 prescriptions filled back in 2025, and she have to go back and prove exactly how each one was filled. Prescriptions they already reviewed and already approved and already paid. And it is not just those 40. Every refill on those same prescription numbers is fair game too. Here is the trap. When these audits find a "discrepancy," it is almost never a patient getting the wrong drug or the wrong dose. It is clerical. A missing initial, a signature, a technicality. And they use that clerical nitpick to claw back the entire amount they paid you. You already handed the medicine to the patient. Months later they decide the paperwork was imperfect and take all the money back. Dispensing an insured prescription is a gamble where you can win nothing and lose everything. In eight years as a pharmacist in a chain setting, she had exactly one audit. One. Since she opened her independent, she has had at least one every single year. The big three PBMs are owned by the same companies that own their own pharmacies. When the PBM owns the pharmacy, why would it ever audit itself? Every prescription its own pharmacy fills in error just makes the parent company more money. They cannot lose. Heads they claw back from me, tails they pay themselves. That is the whole game. They gamble with your prescriptions, they squeeze the independent who answers to you, and they wave through the chain that answers to them. That is why we fired them. No PBM sets our prices, no PBM audits us into the ground, no parent company profits when your prescription goes wrong. Cost of the medication plus a flat fee, and you see it before you pay. Head to look at the price checker, and transfer today to save. See ya.

Forest Park Pharmacy

13,143 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

It is not the fault of the Igbos. They are simply employing their own people, replacing indigenous workers with more Igbos. The highest superintendent in Chevron is an Igbo woman — she is the one doing this. Can you blame her? No. I blame our useless, spineless Itsekiri leaders. Out of 18 graduates recently employed for work on Itsekiri land, 12 are Igbos. The rest are just 2 Yorubas and a few from other tribes. Not a single Itsekiri graduate was employed — in our own land. And some of you still want to blame the Igbos for dominating? No. That is their nature. That is who they are. They look out for one another without apology. You cannot blame them for it. Where are the leaders of Warri Kingdom? Who are the Itsekiri contractors to Chevron? Who negotiated these employment arrangements? Why is this happening under their watch while our graduates are completely shut out? Ilaje and itsekiri graduates protested just last year for employment why were igbos employed? Who let it happen? These are the questions we should be asking. Chevron and these companies do this because they know Itsekiris are not violent people. They know they can take us for granted and walk over us as they like. Would they try this with the Ibibios or the Ijaws? With the Hausa or Fulani? Never. They would not dare. Even the Igbos themselves would never tolerate this in their own land. They would burn the company down before allowing such a thing. But Itsekiris? We are lions without teeth. These companies know it and act with impunity. Where were our leaders when an Igbo woman was put in charge of employment? Did anyone seriously expect her not to fill the place with her own people? Of course she would. So stop blaming the Igbos. The problem is not them. The problem is us — and the silent, weak leaders who have allowed this to happen on Itsekiri land. By Lord_of_Warri Itsekiri Activist and Historian. on 𝕏, FB And TikTok.
4:35

It is not the fault of the Igbos. They are simply employing their own people, replacing indigenous workers with more Igbos. The highest superintendent in Chevron is an Igbo woman — she is the one doing this. Can you blame her? No. I blame our useless, spineless Itsekiri leaders. Out of 18 graduates recently employed for work on Itsekiri land, 12 are Igbos. The rest are just 2 Yorubas and a few from other tribes. Not a single Itsekiri graduate was employed — in our own land. And some of you still want to blame the Igbos for dominating? No. That is their nature. That is who they are. They look out for one another without apology. You cannot blame them for it. Where are the leaders of Warri Kingdom? Who are the Itsekiri contractors to Chevron? Who negotiated these employment arrangements? Why is this happening under their watch while our graduates are completely shut out? Ilaje and itsekiri graduates protested just last year for employment why were igbos employed? Who let it happen? These are the questions we should be asking. Chevron and these companies do this because they know Itsekiris are not violent people. They know they can take us for granted and walk over us as they like. Would they try this with the Ibibios or the Ijaws? With the Hausa or Fulani? Never. They would not dare. Even the Igbos themselves would never tolerate this in their own land. They would burn the company down before allowing such a thing. But Itsekiris? We are lions without teeth. These companies know it and act with impunity. Where were our leaders when an Igbo woman was put in charge of employment? Did anyone seriously expect her not to fill the place with her own people? Of course she would. So stop blaming the Igbos. The problem is not them. The problem is us — and the silent, weak leaders who have allowed this to happen on Itsekiri land. By Lord_of_Warri Itsekiri Activist and Historian. on 𝕏, FB And TikTok.

Lord Of Warri

166,807 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat