Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

valid reason

Punch Cat

1,304,958 subscribers

2,000,958 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Valid reason for break up ?

Valid reason for break up ?

Ijoba 𓃵 💵💰

51,202 views • 2 months ago

most valid reason to punch your monitor

most valid reason to punch your monitor

Frowzy 🐿️

167,723 views • 1 month ago

this is a valid reason for breakup

this is a valid reason for breakup

NO CONTEXT HUMANS

17,118,341 views • 2 years ago

"because i don't want to" is a valid reason

"because i don't want to" is a valid reason

𝑇𝐴𝑅𝐸𝐾

57,178 views • 1 month ago

She got a valid reason 🤭 #filian #vtuber #chachavmom #shorts

She got a valid reason 🤭 #filian #vtuber #chachavmom #shorts

Fillian Tv

54,794 views • 8 months ago

A valid reason to dump a weak man..🫣🫣🤭😎🤨🤞

A valid reason to dump a weak man..🫣🫣🤭😎🤨🤞

Zanele Mokoena 🇿🇦

102,319 views • 3 years ago

Kelley not liking Beyonce is absolutely a valid reason to vote her ass out. 🤭

Kelley not liking Beyonce is absolutely a valid reason to vote her ass out. 🤭

✨ 𝐓𝐄𝐀𝐌 𝐍𝐎𝐑𝐓𝐇 ✨

42,445 views • 1 year ago

When she says "you never listen when I talk" but you have a valid reason this time

When she says "you never listen when I talk" but you have a valid reason this time

Antidepressant Content

589,922 views • 9 months ago

used to hate martinelli for no valid reason but now he has given me a solid one

used to hate martinelli for no valid reason but now he has given me a solid one

⚡

94,298 views • 6 months ago

For real. NOONE can give me a valid reason why I wouldn’t be a fantastic lawyer 😌

For real. NOONE can give me a valid reason why I wouldn’t be a fantastic lawyer 😌

*•. dellie isla .•*

24,797 views • 3 months ago

This is a valid reason not to go to church today than causing Chaos. Watch and understand 👇🏾

This is a valid reason not to go to church today than causing Chaos. Watch and understand 👇🏾

Cassie

53,486 views • 3 months ago

Tag that one person who’s always with their phone, and they always have a valid reason for being with it?

Tag that one person who’s always with their phone, and they always have a valid reason for being with it?

TECNO Mobile Nigeria

39,004 views • 4 months ago

The condition of the Abuja–Lokoja road is terrible. If you must travel, make sure the reason is valid — otherwise, stay at home

The condition of the Abuja–Lokoja road is terrible. If you must travel, make sure the reason is valid — otherwise, stay at home

Cleverly 💐

180,611 views • 7 months ago

At booth no. 106, 107, 108 of Mohiuddinagar assembly constituency, police personnel have entered different households and are brutally beating and threatening voters without any valid reason. Chief Electoral Officer, Bihar Election Commission of India

At booth no. 106, 107, 108 of Mohiuddinagar assembly constituency, police personnel have entered different households and are brutally beating and threatening voters without any valid reason. Chief Electoral Officer, Bihar Election Commission of India

Rashtriya Janata Dal

167,268 views • 8 months ago

Ruben Amorim's man management: -Benched a fit Sesko till he lost confidence. -Played Bruno everywhere till he broke down - benched Kobbie till he got injured on the bench. -Plays Dalot everywhere. Now there's a valid reason to lose: AFCON

Ruben Amorim's man management: -Benched a fit Sesko till he lost confidence. -Played Bruno everywhere till he broke down - benched Kobbie till he got injured on the bench. -Plays Dalot everywhere. Now there's a valid reason to lose: AFCON

Dex

438,273 views • 7 months ago

I belong to the SC community, and I've been a Christian since childhood. I go to church every Sunday, and I love my faith at the same time, I deeply respect Hinduism too 😌 The reason is simple The Pawan Kalyan I admired in my childhood is the same Pawan Kalyan I see today His character hasn't changed even a little I admire his ideology, the way he speaks, and the way he lives even while loving his own faith, he has always shown respect towards other religions People point fingers at him, but they rarely have a valid reason There isn't even a single criminal case against him If he has ₹10, he'll borrow another ₹10 just to help someone in need that's the kind of person Pawan Kalyan garu is 🙏🏻 If not someone like him, then who else should I admire? I'll remain his admirer for the rest of my life These are the heartfelt words of a lady who shared her feelings with me Her name is SAILEJA ❤️🙏🏻

I belong to the SC community, and I've been a Christian since childhood. I go to church every Sunday, and I love my faith at the same time, I deeply respect Hinduism too 😌 The reason is simple The Pawan Kalyan I admired in my childhood is the same Pawan Kalyan I see today His character hasn't changed even a little I admire his ideology, the way he speaks, and the way he lives even while loving his own faith, he has always shown respect towards other religions People point fingers at him, but they rarely have a valid reason There isn't even a single criminal case against him If he has ₹10, he'll borrow another ₹10 just to help someone in need that's the kind of person Pawan Kalyan garu is 🙏🏻 If not someone like him, then who else should I admire? I'll remain his admirer for the rest of my life These are the heartfelt words of a lady who shared her feelings with me Her name is SAILEJA ❤️🙏🏻

mounisha JSP

48,075 views • 21 days ago

This woman is an absolute lunatic and a menace to the justice system. In her sick, twisted mind she truly believes that she is entitled to invade the privacy of American citizens if she has a some wild thought in her demented head that there may be something in their private data she would be able to exploit. "Well I don't know what I don't know." So, everyone must open up all their most personal information so that Karen Read can decide what's beneficial to her even though there is no legal valid reason to allow that type of invasion of privacy. She is dangerous and the attorneys assisting her with her attempted abuse of other people's constitutional rights are not, in any way, shape or form, upholding or protecting the Constitution.

This woman is an absolute lunatic and a menace to the justice system. In her sick, twisted mind she truly believes that she is entitled to invade the privacy of American citizens if she has a some wild thought in her demented head that there may be something in their private data she would be able to exploit. "Well I don't know what I don't know." So, everyone must open up all their most personal information so that Karen Read can decide what's beneficial to her even though there is no legal valid reason to allow that type of invasion of privacy. She is dangerous and the attorneys assisting her with her attempted abuse of other people's constitutional rights are not, in any way, shape or form, upholding or protecting the Constitution.

Julie Carpenter

11,505 views • 1 month ago

Added context to my tiny diffusion model to enable sequential generation of longer outputs! Currently the context is a quarter of the sequence length (seq_len=256, context_len=64). I have a theory that the less semantic-value-per-token, the worse the “curse of parallel decoding” is. With parallel decoding, we independently predict multiple tokens in one step. With the sentence “My poker hand was a ___ ___”, two valid predictions are “two pair” and “straight flush”. Because each token prediction is independent though, we can end up with a nonsensical output like “two flush”. This seems to be exacerbated with low semantic-value-per-token, as now you need more tokens to express the same concept. Instead of needing to independently predict two tokens, we might need to predict 10 instead (which is of course much harder). The model currently has noticeably worse output compared to nanogpt (similar size) and I believe this is a main reason. I’ll try adding confidence-aware parallel decoding (from NVIDIA’s Fast-dLLM paper) and other tricks and see how much they improve generation quality.

Added context to my tiny diffusion model to enable sequential generation of longer outputs! Currently the context is a quarter of the sequence length (seq_len=256, context_len=64). I have a theory that the less semantic-value-per-token, the worse the “curse of parallel decoding” is. With parallel decoding, we independently predict multiple tokens in one step. With the sentence “My poker hand was a _ _”, two valid predictions are “two pair” and “straight flush”. Because each token prediction is independent though, we can end up with a nonsensical output like “two flush”. This seems to be exacerbated with low semantic-value-per-token, as now you need more tokens to express the same concept. Instead of needing to independently predict two tokens, we might need to predict 10 instead (which is of course much harder). The model currently has noticeably worse output compared to nanogpt (similar size) and I believe this is a main reason. I’ll try adding confidence-aware parallel decoding (from NVIDIA’s Fast-dLLM paper) and other tricks and see how much they improve generation quality.

Nathan Barry

89,040 views • 9 months ago

🚨BREAKING: In Columbus, Ohio, ICE agents hit a U.S. citizen’s vehicle, and then admitted, on camera, that they “do this all the time”… before driving away. A 17-year-old U.S. citizen was reportedly on his way to church, when multiple officials surrounded his car, backed into his front bumper, and jumped out of their vehicles. When he rolled down his window, they told him… “We got the wrong person.” And walked back toward their cars. The 17-year-old got out to document what happened, and told an officer they had hit his vehicle… And the response was: “You can take a picture if you want. We do this all the time. You’re okay.” And then they drove off. The Fourth Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches and seizures. And courts have made clear that a “seizure” isn’t just being arrested, or put in handcuffs. It also includes situations where law enforcement use their authority in a way that blocks your freedom to leave… or creates an intimidating, forced encounter. So, when officers surround a car, hit it while backing up, and pull a teenager into a sudden law enforcement interaction, with no valid reason… At minimum, it’s a reckless stop. At worst, it’s an unlawful seizure, with property damage, and no accountability. And then there’s the part when she casually said… “We do this all the time.” Because that turns an “oops” moment into a pattern. And when that pattern violates your constitutional rights and due process, it starts to feel a lot like the government is using the Constitution like they use the Bible… Quoted when it’s useful, ignored when it isn’t.

🚨BREAKING: In Columbus, Ohio, ICE agents hit a U.S. citizen’s vehicle, and then admitted, on camera, that they “do this all the time”… before driving away. A 17-year-old U.S. citizen was reportedly on his way to church, when multiple officials surrounded his car, backed into his front bumper, and jumped out of their vehicles. When he rolled down his window, they told him… “We got the wrong person.” And walked back toward their cars. The 17-year-old got out to document what happened, and told an officer they had hit his vehicle… And the response was: “You can take a picture if you want. We do this all the time. You’re okay.” And then they drove off. The Fourth Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches and seizures. And courts have made clear that a “seizure” isn’t just being arrested, or put in handcuffs. It also includes situations where law enforcement use their authority in a way that blocks your freedom to leave… or creates an intimidating, forced encounter. So, when officers surround a car, hit it while backing up, and pull a teenager into a sudden law enforcement interaction, with no valid reason… At minimum, it’s a reckless stop. At worst, it’s an unlawful seizure, with property damage, and no accountability. And then there’s the part when she casually said… “We do this all the time.” Because that turns an “oops” moment into a pattern. And when that pattern violates your constitutional rights and due process, it starts to feel a lot like the government is using the Constitution like they use the Bible… Quoted when it’s useful, ignored when it isn’t.

Jesus Freakin Congress

110,650 views • 1 month ago

I'm sorry but it's such a braindead, pointless, utterly inane take that for some reason people like to parrot. This guy said Drogba wouldn't SURVIVE in the premier league today (insane). He takes the idea that "standards improve with time" (valid) and applies it like a sledgehammer, without an ounce of thought. Messi struggled far more in the 2010 world cup (still in his athletic prime), than he did in 2022 (washed). So did football actually get worse? Or are performances and stats influenced by dozens of contextual factors that these simplistic era arguments completely ignore? Maybe it's not as simple as 'he's more modern therefore better' At what point does football 'get away' from the upper echelon players? Maldini played across 3 decades at a high level. Drogba thrived in the exact same era that Messi and Ronaldo did. I can be intentionally obtuse and point out that Salah thrived in the modern PL, while he struggled for Chelsea barely a year after Drogba lifted the UCL. How does this dude square these things? if the past was so much worse, then surely every top player today should've destroyed it when they were actually coming through right? Or at least in their 20s? Danny frickin Welbeck is still bossing it, but I suppose Rooney would struggle? I have never seen any indication that a top player can't translate at least 90% of their value from one era to the next. The only thing that stops them is athletic decline. I cant believe I have to explain this - but even if it's granted that standards today are better, that doesn't necessarily mean a goal today is more valuable. Those are two separate things lmao. There have been simply more goals from ~2010 onwards, and especially the last few years. For a plethora of reasons (more refined build-up, tactical advances, rule changes, more expensive squads/superteams, greater disparity between top teams and the rest etc). The mid 2000s averaged about 2.6 goals in the PL (around that if i remember right). The last few years it's been over 3(!!). If anything goals are EASIER to come by for the top forwards today (we can quibble with semantics, and it wont be true in ALL cases, but generally this is true). When watching old games - yes u see some practices, or some spaces that wouldn't exist today. At the same time, I often see shocking defending, or certain spaces open up today that wouldn't have existed in the past, so let's not oversell how good defending is now, it's not a case of 'every single thing is definitely way better now' either. Evolution is not always linear. Regardless, doesnt it naturally follow that higher standards, owed to better data/training etc would allow those past players to also scale up? Isn't that just a super obvious conclusion to come to? So what is the point of constantly saying "things are way better" or "this ex player wouldnt survive" other than to smugly and ignorantly disparage past talent? What other point is being made? I've attached a clip of Arteta (who seems to be Alex's lord and saviour pbuh going by his YT thumbnails) saying that he would be a better player today with all these modern advancements.

I'm sorry but it's such a braindead, pointless, utterly inane take that for some reason people like to parrot. This guy said Drogba wouldn't SURVIVE in the premier league today (insane). He takes the idea that "standards improve with time" (valid) and applies it like a sledgehammer, without an ounce of thought. Messi struggled far more in the 2010 world cup (still in his athletic prime), than he did in 2022 (washed). So did football actually get worse? Or are performances and stats influenced by dozens of contextual factors that these simplistic era arguments completely ignore? Maybe it's not as simple as 'he's more modern therefore better' At what point does football 'get away' from the upper echelon players? Maldini played across 3 decades at a high level. Drogba thrived in the exact same era that Messi and Ronaldo did. I can be intentionally obtuse and point out that Salah thrived in the modern PL, while he struggled for Chelsea barely a year after Drogba lifted the UCL. How does this dude square these things? if the past was so much worse, then surely every top player today should've destroyed it when they were actually coming through right? Or at least in their 20s? Danny frickin Welbeck is still bossing it, but I suppose Rooney would struggle? I have never seen any indication that a top player can't translate at least 90% of their value from one era to the next. The only thing that stops them is athletic decline. I cant believe I have to explain this - but even if it's granted that standards today are better, that doesn't necessarily mean a goal today is more valuable. Those are two separate things lmao. There have been simply more goals from ~2010 onwards, and especially the last few years. For a plethora of reasons (more refined build-up, tactical advances, rule changes, more expensive squads/superteams, greater disparity between top teams and the rest etc). The mid 2000s averaged about 2.6 goals in the PL (around that if i remember right). The last few years it's been over 3(!!). If anything goals are EASIER to come by for the top forwards today (we can quibble with semantics, and it wont be true in ALL cases, but generally this is true). When watching old games - yes u see some practices, or some spaces that wouldn't exist today. At the same time, I often see shocking defending, or certain spaces open up today that wouldn't have existed in the past, so let's not oversell how good defending is now, it's not a case of 'every single thing is definitely way better now' either. Evolution is not always linear. Regardless, doesnt it naturally follow that higher standards, owed to better data/training etc would allow those past players to also scale up? Isn't that just a super obvious conclusion to come to? So what is the point of constantly saying "things are way better" or "this ex player wouldnt survive" other than to smugly and ignorantly disparage past talent? What other point is being made? I've attached a clip of Arteta (who seems to be Alex's lord and saviour pbuh going by his YT thumbnails) saying that he would be a better player today with all these modern advancements.

TH14 Comps

350,400 views • 7 months ago