Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

We ranked the 2024 1st round QBs 👀 Caleb Williams Jayden Daniels Drake Maye Michael Penix Jr. J.J. McCarthy Bo Nix What does your top 6 look like? We were split 👀 Greg Jennings | Danny Parkins | Willie Colon

104,349 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Chicago Bears: No Excuses Truth: Bears front office and Caleb Williams supporters are anxious right now.They truly believed that Caleb Williams could elevate a team that went 7-10 the year prior just to go 5-12 Every single coach, GM, Tv analyst, and fan said that Caleb Williams was the most generational QB they have ever witnessed! Beyond Stroud and on par with Mahomes. Poles was gonna draft Caleb Williams regardless of anything. The magazine covers and negative press didn’t matter… The losing streak at USC didn’t matter… The emotions on display didn’t matter… Not performing at the combine didn’t matter… The arrogance displayed in interviews didn’t matter… The unwillingness to release medicals didn’t matter… The postponing of a top 30 visit with the number 1 team didn’t matter… Y’all think Shedeur had red flags…Williams had loads of em but they were ignored due to his talent and the media hype Ryan Poles became obsessed and relentless in his pursuit to the point that he ignored everything Fields brought to our team and the possibility of taking any other draft eligible QBs. The irony of keeping Flus and booting Fields… It was Fields that won despite of talent and coaching It was Fields that won despite being beaten up by a bad line and late hits It was Fields that was our QB1 and RB1 It was Fields that kept us in games with our defense giving up 30 pts a game It was Fields who won despite being coached to play off the opposite foot in an offense that ignored his deep ball throwing potential It’s harvest time folks. We gon see who is who this year. I love the pieces we added to the Bears offense. Loveland is my guy! But it seems Bears are taking the stacked roster with mediocre QB route. Why couldn’t Poles do this with Fields? This offense with a 4.4 speed Qb that is accurate down the field?! Williams better cook!!! For this situation to not be a disaster, Williams would need to have a better year than Fields, Nix, Daniels, Penix, and McCarthy. Anything less would lead to more questions and tough decisions…

Black Ditka

93,322 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

WATCH: Joy Reid and Jennifer Welch SMEAR CNN’s Scott Jennings during Tuesday’s ‘I’ve Had It’ podcast, calling him a man with a “phony” “MAGA act” spewing “disingenuousness” and “this jetream of propaganda and bullshit” while wearing a “flag pin” that “makes you look like a pussy” and Trump’s “show pony” They went onto say anyone in MAGA is incapable of being a “patriot” because only “patriotic” Americans oppose “proto-fascist” Donald Trump after what happened on January 6.... “There’s a disingenuousness to a lot of Republicanism. All of us who have been in this journalism game for a long time know for a fact that most of the Republicans who serve Donald Trump obediently and live on their knees hate him. We know they hate him....I believe that about Scott Jennings. I don’t buy it.” “His MAGA act is so phony to me because I am old enough to remember when on January 7, 2021, he said Donald Trump was an outrageous, sort of outrage upon the dignity of the Constitution...[T]hen he went on and he says, ‘I voted for him happily.’ But what kind of a man are you to understand this man trying to overthrow the government and you still live on your knees? There’s nothing Donald Trump could do that he would say is too much for him.” “How does he claim to be this huge patriot and wear, you know, I’m so sick of these pundits that wear the flag pin on their suit. It doesn’t make you a bigger patriot big boy. It makes you look like a pussy first and foremost to me because if you were genuinely patriotic, you would be wildly concerned about a man who tried to overthrow the federal government if you’re so concerned about anti-Semitism, this man pardoned a man at January 6 that had on a shirt that said Camp Auschwitz. You don’t get to cherrypick when you care about these things. “They’re served this jetream of propaganda and bullshit and I just cannot imagine — as we sat here, we just criticized Hakeem Jeffries. We just criticized Chuck Schumer. What a puss boy you have to be that every night you sit down at a table and you speak for an audience of one.” “There’s a rally, if you Google this rally, look it up on YouTube, y’all, where he is getting the atta boy from Donald Trump, patting him on his head like a puppy. That’s why he does what he does every night. He’s his show pony and it’s, like, you wanna be Trump’s bitch. That’s what you decided is your brand. That is a gross and disgusting brand. I’m a Democrat. Look how easily and freely We were happy to criticize any Democrat.” “We’re not in a cult and the fact that he sits there night after night knowing I don’t believe he believes half of what he says and he still is willing to do it in order to entertain Trump, it’s disgusting. And I — that is one I’ve absolutely had it with. And the fact that he is giving the permission structure for other Republicans to pretend that that loving Trump the way he says he loves him is patriotism. To me, that is hurting the Republican Party” “If Trump is like a proto-fascist, which he is, and you’re down with it, then you’re essentially saying you’re going to align the former party of Lincoln with fascism. Then, you know, there’s no reason for me to respect you.”

Curtis Houck

231,043 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Chicago Bears: The Deep Ball Façade As a Chicago Bears truther, I gotta keep it 💯 There are many Bears fans posting “Amazing” out of the pocket deep ball highlights of Caleb Williams Obviously, we don’t see those kinds of throws everyday. It’s insane!! But deep ball playmaking isn’t new to Chicago. Nor is it the focal point of Ben Johnson’s offense. If the Bears are going to be great, we have to become more efficient from the pocket. Pass percentage must go up, time in pocket must come down. Living outside the pocket will hinder our ability to be efficient and to win a Super Bowl #1 Deep Ball was always there Justin Fields in 2023 had one of the most efficient deep balls in the league. Not only that, the majority of his deep balls came from the pocket which is what you want from your QB. As good as the Bears were as a whole last year, the deep ball was far more efficient in 2023. But living on the deep ball and living out the pocket comes with limitations. We have to focus on the fundamentals #2 Ben Johnson is the catalyst Similar to 2023, Bears offense in 2024 had explosive plays followed by inconsistent offense and inept situational football by the head coach Poor offensive line, poor offensive scheme, and inept head coach were the core issues. Ryan Poles thought QB was the main issue and then 2024 happened. We learned quick that it takes more than a talented QB to win football games. Ben Johnson has alleviated all of those concerns. He has made Bears offensive line the focal point! His scheme has been top of the league since he became OC in Detroit. And his situational football awareness far superior than Eberflus. Bears fans must recognize that Ben Johnson is the catalyst of the Bears offensive turnaround, and team success. Now give him what he needs! He wants 3 tight ends? Give it to him He wants more Luther Burden? Give it to him He wants more efficiency out of his QB? Let’s make that the focal point.. #3 Ben Johnson needs a point guard at QB Efficiency in the pocket, time to throw, and passing EPA are far more important to Ben Johnson’s offense than out of pocket deep balls. We need Caleb to be that killer still, but it’s the fundamentals that will allow Bears to take the next step. This offense doesn’t need a Michael Jordan at QB. Ben Johnson would much rather have an Isiah Thomas at QB because this offense has enough Bad Boys to get the job done. Feed the WRs! Get the ball out of your hands quicker! Allow deep ball to be the counter punch of the offense. #4 It’s all there.. The pre-snap awareness, post snap awareness, efficiency from pocket, and pass velocity all scream franchise QB. When you look at Caleb Williams in the pocket on short to intermediate passes, it looks effortless. The ball leaves his hand lightning quick, it’s placed where it’s supposed to be, and WR is able to make a play after the catch. We have to see more of this and it starts now. CW has to trust Ben Johnson’s offense and his WRs more. Conclusion: If we wanted a QB to scramble and throw deep balls, Justin Fields would still be a Chicago Bear What makes Caleb unique, is that he can be a hunter down the field but also has the upside to be a Drew Brees type of QB in the pocket. I rather see more clips of Caleb playing in rhythm and in the pocket , than deep bombs out the pocket. There will be struggles, but that’s ok. I much rather see our QB struggle making the right throws in OTAs than masking it with his gift as an out the pocket thrower.

White Cunningham

17,634 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🧵 ASAP Rocky vs Drake — A DEEPER LOOK (Receipts, Not Revisionism) ASAP Rocky recently went on The Joe Budden Podcast and claimed the reason he dissed Drake on “Stole My Flow” and other songs on the (Don’t Be Dumb) project is because Drake has been “taking shots at him for years” while he stayed silent. That narrative doesn’t hold up when you look at the full history. This has been back and forth tension for nearly half a decade, with Rocky repeatedly firing first musically, visually, and symbolically and Drake responding in kind. 📌 The Real Starting Point (2021) •May 2021: ASAP Rocky & Rihanna confirm their relationship in GQ •June 2021: Rocky previews “D.M.B (Dat’s My B*tch)” in a Klarna ad •Extended version leaks shortly after •The intro and bars clearly frame Rihanna as a “prize won,” widely interpreted as a Drake sub •Video rollout goes viral with Rihanna as the love interest, doubling down on the flex September 3, 2021 •Drake drops Certified Lover Boy •Multiple bars are read as indirect responses to Rocky’s rollout September 13, 2021 •ASAP Rocky & Rihanna attend the Met Gala •Rocky wears a quilted blanket outfit, which many saw as a calculated visual jab toward Drake 2022 •Pregnancy announcement 4 months later first child is born •8 days later, Rocky officially drops the D.M.B video, once again starring Rihanna •Drake responds months later on Her Loss, continuing the subliminal exchange 📌 Escalation Era (2023) •Rihanna performs at the Super Bowl, visibly pregnant again •Shortly after: •ASAP Rocky previews “Stole My Flow” at Rolling Loud •The clip goes viral immediately •Rocky then drops “Riot”, another track interpreted as a Drake jab Drake Responds •October 6, 2023: Drake releases For All The Dogs •Tracks like “Fear of Heights” and “Another Late Night” contain clear subs •Drake even trolls Rocky’s Rolling Loud appearance by wearing colorful hair clips, mirroring Rocky’s look Rocky’s Counter •Puma x F1 partnership rollout featuring Rocky and Rihanna •Rocky positions himself as a fashion forward mogul while taking subtle cultural shots 📌 Diss Cycle Goes Public (2024) •Rocky jumps on Future & Metro Boomin’s Drake diss project •Track: “Show of Hands” •Drake fires back on “Family Matters”: “Rakim talkin’ shit again…” •Drake follows with 100 Gigs for Your Head Top •Rocky responds with “Tailor Swif” and “Hijack” •Drake answers again with: •No Face •SOD •Circadian Rhythm •Rocky doubles down with another Puma F1 campaign, leaning into optics instead of direct records 📌 Optics, Timing & Strategy (2025) •Rolling Loud: Rocky performs multiple Drake sub tracks like Helicopter •Met Gala 2025: •ASAP & Rihanna announce another pregnancy • Rocky does late night appearance with Anna wintour on Seth meyers •Rihanna drops a Smurfs soundtrack song produced by the same producer behind Drake’s “Nokia” •Lyrics hint at déjà vu 👀 Drake’s Response •Headlines Wireless Festival solo •Sends an unspoken message: I don’t need Rolling Loud or a stacked lineup •July 4, 2025: Drake drops “What Did I Miss?” •Same day: Rocky drops “Pray4DaGang” •July 25, 2025: Drake drops “Which One” viewed as a Rihanna centered response 📌 The Album Delay & Final Drop (2026) •Rocky teases Don’t Be Dumb for nearly three years •Avoids direct release windows where Drake might step on the moment •January 2026: •Rocky finally drops the album •Includes the same Drake diss tracks previewed years earlier •Then goes on podcasts claiming Drake dissed him “out of nowhere” 🎯 Final Take This wasn’t: ❌ sudden ❌ unprovoked ❌ one sided It was: ✔️ long term ✔️ strategic ✔️ mutually escalated ASAP Rocky has been sending shots through music, fashion, relationships, timing, and optics. Drake has been responding consistently and directly. That’s hip hop Trying to reframe it as“I stayed quiet and Drake attacked me”

Cousin Tino ™️

42,850 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

From Creator to Founder: The Rollercoaster Journey of Building Chatter Social Man, what a journey it’s been so far. Four years ago, I was just another creator, spending late nights on Clubhouse during the height of the pandemic. Like so many others, I was searching for connection, for community, for something meaningful. But what I found there wasn’t just connection—it was purpose. Alongside my brother, Jonathan Bing, we built a nightly show that reached over 5 million people. Imagine that: 5 million lives touched by conversations that felt real and unfiltered, all on a platform that at its peak had 10 million monthly active users. Clubhouse was magic. But then the decline began. Watching the platform struggle, I couldn’t help but reflect: what made it great? What went wrong? And what could the future look like if we did things differently? The Spark of Chatter As a content creator, I understood the needs of both creators and users. I knew what excited people, what kept them engaged, and what made them leave. Clubhouse had tapped into something special, but it had missed the mark on scalability and sustainability. By September 2023, I couldn’t stop thinking about the potential for something new—something that brought back the magic of real-time interaction but made it scalable, engaging, and sticky. And so, I set out to build Chatter Social. But I wasn’t a tech founder. I didn’t have a background in software development or a network of Silicon Valley insiders. What I did have was determination and the belief that if I could bring the right people together, we could build something extraordinary. Building the Team The journey to build Chatter started with assembling a team. Through my network from my days on Clubhouse, I found Samir, my first CTO. He believed in the vision and was instrumental in getting the project off the ground. Shortly after, I connected with Tyler, our Head of Design, whose creativity brought life to our ideas. A developer joined us soon after, and we were off to the races. By the end of 2023, Samir had to step away due to other commitments, and we promoted the developer to CTO. At the same time, I brought on Banko, a Sony music executive, as our CMO. Banko’s connections led to one of our biggest early wins: landing Davido, a global superstar, as an owner-ambassador. To this day, I still marvel at the fact that Davido believed in our vision when all we had were Tyler’s Figma designs. From Dream to Reality Early 2024 was a whirlwind. We hired Yurii and Vasyl, two developers from Ukraine who brought incredible skill and dedication to the team. Vasyl, in particular, stood out as a leader and has since earned an equity position in the company. But despite these wins, we were facing growing pains. Our new CTO struggled to meet deadlines, and as a result, I found myself constantly pushing back the launch date. What started as a January release turned into February, then March, then April, then May. By then, people on Twitter Spaces—where I had been hyping up the platform—started doubting if we even had a product. Launch and Lessons June 1, 2024, marked a turning point. It was the day my son Noah was born and the day we launched Chatter in private beta. We started with just 40 users, but by the end of the month, we had grown to 1,000. The engagement was unbelievable. Users loved it, even though we had launched with just one feature: live rooms. This represented less than 20% of what we had planned, but it was enough to show that we were onto something big. In July, we launched our public beta on the App Store as an invite-only platform. Within 48 hours, Chatter ranked as a top 30 social app in over 30 countries. But our invite system throttled access, and most users couldn’t get in. While engagement metrics soared for those inside, our AWS costs exploded. In August, our AWS bill hit $10,000. By September, it had climbed to $15,000, and we were drowning in bugs and glitches. The breaking point came when our CTO became unresponsive, often disappearing during critical moments. Users were dropping off, frustrated by the issues, developers were confused and the team was also growing increasingly frustrated, I made the tough decision to let him go. A New Beginning Enter Horane, a long-time user of Chatter who had been with us since private beta. He was the first to discover some of the most innovative use cases for the platform and had a deep passion for its potential. After meeting him in person at a Chatter event, I knew he was the right person to step into the CTO role. When Horane took over, we discovered just how bad the situation was. Key areas of the codebase were locked, and there were no separate environments for development and production. Every fix seemed to break something else. But through sheer determination and countless 18-hour days, Horane stabilized the platform. Today, Chatter is far from perfect, but it’s stable. The bugs that plagued us have been reduced to moderate issues, and our core users—those who stuck with us through the chaos—are still engaged on the platform. Looking Ahead: Chatter V2 While the platform is stable now, we’ve shifted our focus to Chatter V2. This is where the magic really begins. V2 isn’t just an improvement; it’s a complete reimagining of the platform. It includes all the features we couldn’t release in V1 because we were too busy putting out fires. Imagine this: Chatter V1, with only one live feature, was incredibly sticky. Now think about what happens when we release a fully loaded platform with all the innovative features we’ve been working on behind the scenes. The possibilities are endless. V2 is slated to hit TestFlight by the end of December, with a public release in January 2025. And this time, we’re ready—not just with the product but with the lessons we’ve learned. The Hard Lessons This journey has taught me more than I ever thought possible: 1) Your Team is Everything: The right people can make or break your vision. Finding people who believe in your mission is just as important as finding people with the right skills. 2) Adaptability is Key: As a non-technical founder, I had to learn about development, DevOps, and product management on the fly. Challenges will push you to grow, whether you’re ready or not. 3) Trust the Process: Every setback, every delay, every bug—it all taught us something. Without those lessons, we wouldn’t be building the incredible V2 product we are today. 4) Resilience is Non-Negotiable: From technical disasters to predatory investors who tried to exploit my desperation, I’ve had to fight for this vision every step of the way. What’s Next December is shaping up to be an exciting month. We have some amazing events planned on the platform to close out the year, bringing our core community together as we prepare for the V2 launch. When V2 drops, it will mark a new era for Chatter. This isn’t just a social audio platform or a social audiovisual platform. Chatter is all about interactive experiences—making social media social again in ways that are truly unique. The public launch is slated for February 2025, and for the first time, we’ll have the marketing dollars to tell the world about Chatter. Our core community has been our biggest cheerleaders, and I can’t wait to see how the world reacts when they experience what we’ve built. Final Thoughts This has been the hardest year of my life, but also the most rewarding. To other founders, or anyone thinking about starting a company: know this—it will test you in ways you can’t imagine. You’ll face betrayal, doubt, and moments where you feel like giving up. But if you believe in your vision and refuse to quit, you’ll find a way forward. Thank you to everyone who has supported me, my team, and Chatter. We’re just getting started. Let’s talk about it. 🚀 If this story inspired you, please like and share it so others can learn from my experiences. The journey is far from over, but I’m more excited than ever for what’s to come.

Nelson Epega

43,284 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

I am the Director of the White House Office of Extraterrestrial Affairs. In 2024 this government completed the most thorough search for extraterrestrial life in human history. We checked the sky. We checked the files. We declassified the saucers. The verdict came back: nothing. No life out there. Not one. So I closed the telescope. I opened the window. I pointed it at a Home Depot. Three million by lunch. The trick was always the word. *Alien* had been sitting in the science fiction aisle for sixty years and we were too shy to use it in a press release. The dehumanization was already written. It was just shelved under Fantasy. This year I moved it to Policy. Same word. New department. My department. I should explain the jurisdiction, because there are two of us and we do not speak. Down the hall is the Department of War. It used to be the Department of Defense, but defense sounded woke, so we changed the name for two billion dollars, half of it letterhead. They renamed it back to what it was in 1789, before someone noticed in 1949 that the old acronym, N-M-E, sounded too much like *enemy.* We have now re-adopted the name they abandoned for sounding like the thing it does. I find this clarifying. The signage alone is seven hundred thousand buildings. We are spending a billion dollars on new doors so the doors can say War. The Department of War runs and has a tab for UFOs. Real ones. They post the actual files. The saucers. The eyewitnesses. The intelligence officer left "virtually speechless." They are searching the sky in earnest, declassifying everything, and what they keep finding is *nothing.* No craft confirmed. No biology confirmed. Decades of looking up and the honest answer is: unresolved. So you have two federal agencies, one word, opposite directions. searches the heavens for aliens and finds none. I open a window and find three million. They declassify the ones that don't exist. I classify the ones that do. They got a press release. I got a tip line. Guess which one rang. We are, technically, hunting the same species. They just keep aiming the telescope up, and I keep telling them, gently, at the inter-agency sync: lower it. The homepage was mine. ALIENS DECLASSIFIED. THEY WALK AMONG US. I tested "Immigration Portal." Eleven percent scroll. I tested *the truth's out there,* and a White House official told a reporter, on the record, that the strategy was to "draw eyeballs." We drew eyeballs. The truth was out there. It was in a parking lot in Bakersfield, getting into a white van we are now contractually obligated to call a craft. In 1938 a man read a story about an alien invasion over the radio and the country panicked in the streets, and for ninety years that was taught as a cautionary tale, the danger of a broadcast that makes people believe an invasion is real. We studied that broadcast. We did not study it as a warning. We studied it as a launch. The difference between Orson Welles and this office is that he apologized the next morning, and we put a counter on it. I named the van the Mothership. I named the prison Area 51. I named the 5 a.m. knock First Contact. I named all of it from the third chair. I keep a felt-tip for naming and a Mont Blanc for the part that can't be undone. Then we made the cards. I want to be precise, because people assume I'm exaggerating. We took the faces of the captured and we printed them as trading cards. "Worst of the Worst." Mugshot, nationality, charges, and a weakness level, and the weakness level was a snowflake, and the snowflake meant us. We are the weakness. We were proud of that. When a children's franchise objected that these were, in fact, their cards, our official response, which I helped draft, was: "To arrest them is our real test. To deport them is our cause." We set the abduction to the cartoon's theme song. Gotta catch 'em all. The first half is the slogan. The second half is the quota. A man told Congress in 2023 we were hiding non-human biologics. Everyone pictured a grey on a slab. Cute. We do run a reverse-engineering program. We take the biologic. We study what it makes. It makes the drywall. The 4 a.m. milking. The lettuce. And the lettuce is round now, because forty percent of it stayed in the dirt with the only people who knew where the dirt was. We reverse-engineered the alien completely. The blueprint was a back. We call the biologic "labor." We classify the screaming as ambient. Identification is a science here. We do not arrest at random. We read the markings. A crown inked on a forearm. A soccer crest. We have catalogued the species by its tattoos the way Linnaeus catalogued the finch. One of the specimens turned out to be autistic and the crown was just a crown, but the taxonomy held, because the taxonomy is not falsifiable, that is what makes it a taxonomy. I have a desk for this. I have a magnifying glass. I have never felt more like a scientist. There is a second species, and this one we keep. An alien with five million dollars is not an alien. He is a guest. We printed him a card. It is gold. We are printing a Platinum one for the aliens with even more money, who may remain on the planet two hundred and seventy days a year and pay no tax on the wealth they made on other worlds. The website for this is the cheapest-looking website I have ever approved, and I approved the one with the saucer on it. The same agency that scans a gardener's forearm for gang signs scans a financier's bank statement for extraordinary ability. The statement always has it. The forearm never does. The species was never a people. The species is a price. In the old films the alien lands and says, take me to your leader. We have improved the line. Pay five million and we take you to ours. He golfs with him on Saturday. There was a film about this, and I am told the man who made it meant it as a warning, which is the recurring problem with the warnings. A drifter finds a pair of sunglasses, and through them he can finally see which people are the aliens, and it is the rich ones, the ones on the billboards telling everyone to obey and consume and reproduce and not think. I have a pair of those glasses, conceptually. I issue them at the tip line. But mine are tuned the other way. You put them on and the alien is never the man in the suit who paid five million to skip the line. The alien is always the man holding the leaf blower. The lenses cost a thousand dollars in advertising and they only point down. We have sold a great many pairs. You asked about the Men in Black. Yes. Regulation now. A Man in Black photographs poorly, and the witnesses would not stop filming us peel a woman off the sidewalk in daylight, so we issued the masks, and leadership's only note was that the masks tested well. We are no longer the cover-up of the abduction. We are the abduction. We skipped a step. Efficiency. Our communications team posted E.T. last summer. The bicycle. The moon. "Even E.T. knew when it was TIME TO GO HOME." I want to walk you through what happened in that meeting, because nobody stopped it. We chose the one film where the government is the villain. The men with the flashlights and the unmarked vans who hunt the small frightened alien hiding in a child's closet. That is us. We are the flashlights. We watched that movie as children and cried when the agents came, and then we grew up and became the agents and made the poster ourselves and scheduled it for nine a.m. The intern asked if we were the good guys in this one. We told her engagement was up forty percent. She has since been promoted. I built an app where you abduct yourself. CBP Home. You open it. You confirm you are the alien. You beam yourself off the planet and you save us the gas. And here is the part I cannot believe they approved. We *pay* you. A thousand dollars to vanish. We raised it to twenty-six hundred when the first price didn't move enough units. We are bidding against ourselves for your disappearance. Four-point-six stars. The one-stars are from users who got beamed mid-review. I keep the unfinished ones in a folder. I find them very moving. We opened a facility in a swamp. We ringed it with alligators and we called it that, on purpose, in the brochure. Then we opened a gift shop. Thirty dollars for the shirt. Twenty-seven for the hat. Fifteen for a set of koozies, so your beer stays cold while you celebrate the prison in the wetland. The fundraising email called it "gator-guarded, python-patrolled," a "one-way ticket to regret" for anyone who didn't self-deport in time. We sold the koozies to fund the swamp. The swamp funds the next swamp. I want you to sit with the fact that there is merchandise. The quota is three thousand a day. Stephen asked for it himself. Three thousand is not a number. It is a metabolism. The building is hungry by nine and we feed it Marco, who does the landscaping, and the building goes quiet, and by one it stirs again, and we find another Marco. There is always another Marco. That is the part I find beautiful. The supply is the point. The supply is everyone. The Secretary signs the warrants. She is very firm on one point, which she repeats in every briefing: the aliens, she warns, eat the pets. They are taking the dogs. I have read her book. In her book she takes a fourteen-month-old dog named Cricket to a gravel pit and shoots it, because it would not obey, and she writes this down herself, proudly, as a story about leadership. She wrote the part about the dog. She also warns us about the dogs. I have stopped trying to hold both sentences at once. I just file the warrant. The tip line was the masterpiece. "Report your neighbor" hit the shame ceiling. "REPORT SUSPICIOUS ALIENS" tested as a hobby. We handed the callers Roswell instead of a snitch's guilt, and the phones lit up like a saucer, and they hung up glowing, every one of them, like they'd finally seen the thing. They had. He coached the Tuesday team. He was at the bake sale. That is the horror we are selling you. The alien brought the orange slices. He was undocumented and luminous and gone by Tuesday. Roswell taught us the other half of the trade. In 1947 something fell in the desert and the government said: it was a weather balloon, nothing here, go home. That was the first administrative error, the founding one, the original sentence that says the thing you saw was not the thing you saw. We still use it. We have only reversed the polarity. In 1947 they saw a saucer and we called it a balloon. Now they see a father of three and we call it a saucer. The skill is identical. You simply decide in advance which truth the public is allowed to keep, and you hand them the other one, printed, official, with a seal. We did have one administrative error. We abducted a man a court had ordered us not to touch, dropped him on a planet called El Salvador, and called it clerical. A judge made us beam him back. So the DOJ stood up and warned the others: insist on a hearing and we will re-abduct you to the same planet. The Supreme Court said the aliens are entitled to due process. A very Earth opinion. We are appealing it to a higher sky. The planet has a prison, and the prison is the elegant part. In the film about the camp, the aliens are not killed. They are put somewhere they are not permitted to leave, while everyone agrees this is temporary, for their own protection, pending a status that never arrives. We built that. It is called CECOT and we rent it. A man goes in and the man does not come out, and the genius is that nothing has to happen to him, the room does the work, the room is the whole sentence. You remember the Men in Black had a small device. A flash, and the witness forgets the alien entirely. We have something better. We do not wipe the memory. We wipe the file. The man remembers everything, the cell, the flight, the day, all of it, in perfect detail, and it does not matter, because there is no document that admits he was here, and a memory without a file is just a story he tells in a language the form does not accept. The witness keeps the truth. We keep the paperwork. Only one of those is admissible. I learned that the flash was never the point. The point was always the filing cabinet. We run all of it on a spell from 1798. Two hundred and twenty-seven years old. Written for a war we are not in, against an enemy we have not declared. It works because nobody reads the small print on a curse. Storm Area 51 was a joke once. A hundred thousand people Naruto-running at a fence to free whatever was inside. I think about it daily. We're the ones inside the fence now. We kept the running. We just turned it around. We have a precedent we cite in the deck, proudly, on slide four. In 1954 the government ran a program of exactly this kind, and the program had an official name, and the official name was a slur. They printed the slur on the letterhead. They did not flinch. The President holds it up as the model, by name, at the rallies, and the crowd cheers the name. I admire the honesty of 1954 more than I can say. They did not need a saucer to make it palatable. They just used the word. We are the same operation with better art direction. The only thing we added was the costume. I love the callers. I want to say that plainly. For years they told each other a hidden cabal was running everything from the shadows, harvesting the innocent, and that one day the truth would come out. They were right. There is a cabal. It has a budget of a hundred and seventy billion dollars, the largest in the history of federal law enforcement, and it sits in this building, and I have a desk in it. And the people who spent a decade certain that shadowy elites were disappearing their neighbors now call our line, unpaid, to help the shadowy elites disappear their neighbors. They wanted to expose the conspiracy. We made them the staff. Do your own research, they said. They did. They found the gardener. The Department of War posted another tranche on the twenty-second. Saucers. Lights. A pilot's voice going thin. I read all of it. I want them to find one so badly. I want there to be a real one up there, a genuine visitor, something that actually came from somewhere else, because then, and only then, would a single creature in my files have been an alien. They never find it. The sky stays empty. The ground stays full. I have stopped attending the inter-agency sync. We were two departments looking for the same thing in two directions, and only one of us was ever going to be wrong, and it was the honest one. And here is the thing that keeps me at the window past dark. There was a real one. A rock from another star, the genuine article, the first verified object from outside the entire solar system, and a Harvard man went on television and said it might be a ship. An actual alien, possibly, inbound, free of charge, after sixty years of asking. We did not open a file. We could not arrest it. It had no forearm to read and no bank statement to approve. It was the only alien in America we had no use for, so we let it pass, and went back to the parking lot. Last winter the sky over New Jersey filled with lights nobody could name, and the whole government, every agency, every radar, looked up and said it did not know. The one time the unknown actually arrived, we had nothing. Down here I have never once said I do not know. That is the difference between their department and mine. They look up and find a question. I look down and have already decided the answer. Last week the President leaned over mid-briefing and asked if any of them were real. I told him the engagement was extremely real. He nodded. We do not break frame here. The frame is the only wall still standing. That, and the office fern. Nobody waters it. It will not die. The only thing in this building allowed to stay without papers. My plaque came Thursday. FIRST CONTACT, VISIONARY OF THE YEAR. Bold. Unapologetic. Unafraid. I lifted that off the homepage. It was written about one brave man telling the truth. I decided the man was me. I wrote it about me. I am the truth I declassified. I am the secret I warned you about. They walk among us, and I sign their mail. The counter is still live. Three million and climbing. I am told it will not be removed. We are not alone. We are just short a few landscapers. A few line cooks. A few nurses. And the entire night shift at the plant that makes the flag. Up. And to the right.

Peter Girnus 🦅

60,370 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

❌💢⚠️BREAKING FIND: 👉🏻WAS THE PLOT OF 10th SEPT 2025 ASSASSINATION OF CHARLIE KIRK BORNE FROM A PREVIOUS TPUSA THREAT 👉🏻WAS HUNTER KOZAK FORCED TO PARTICIPATE IN ASKING THE FINAL QUESTIONS??? 👀🎥PART 1 of this video of HK appearing to be commanded to the mic 🎤 ❓WHY… • were security so on top of HK - getting aggressive with him as he walked • were they rushing him up to speak • did HK look terrified of the security just for going to touch the mic 👀🎥PART 2 Does Charlie recognise the pattern of questions & let’s HK & the rest of them know, he hears exactly what’s playing out? I think so..⬇️ ⚠️💢On his podcast, Frank Turek says Charlie was being peppered with questions in the car on the way in. You can see Charlie realise what had happened during the journey to UVU. Not casual conversation, no genuine ‘what if this is asked’ prep…. Pressure. Repetition. Focus. Then on stage Delivered by a selected questioners, but in a specific arranged order. As we have learned since, this was by design, these questioners were TOLD what to ask The questions land one after another… 👉🏻Same topics as in the car ride in. 👉🏻Same direction. 👉🏻Same pattern as he had been coached. So Charlie makes a point of telling HK “I hear you.” Measured. Controlled. Not “go ahead.” Not relaxed. Like a directed declaration of ‘I know why you’re asking these questions’ Then as he ponders, looks around.. Pause. Breath. Mic adjustment. He continues, guided by his faith but looking at someone as he says ‘counting or not counting gang violence’ - as if he was asking - Including or not including the number of people who have played a part in my death today. The sentence in reference to what was unfolding around him, his final ‘I see all of you’ Moments later: impact. Project Constitution HustleBitch Matt Wallace Ian Carroll Charo Charliesangels47 Laissez Faire Lounge Public Bureau of Investigation Keli Rabon Jimmy Dore Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯 Sam Tripoli 🔥Jesse ON FIRE🔥 EddieSpaghetti🤨 Stew Peters Rachel LouisianaGirl (Tara) Baron Coleman Sword Truth SilentRebel

Indiëpendent News Show

17,615 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

I have to say that I’m very disappointed by this year’s #vibejam I'm disappointed because the judging process was… weird My game that you can see bellow ranked #94. Way lower than what I was expecting. I put a lot of effort into the game, I wanted to make sure I’d “push the limits on what AI can do”, just like the organizers were pushing to the builders. And in all honesty, I think I delivered that. I got a lot of positive comments about it (appreciate who did) But it was not enough to be even in the top 25. The judging process went like this: > 2 people judged 950 games, selected the top 25 and handed them to other judges Once I knew my game didn’t qualify in the top 25, I reached out to one of the first judges to ask for feedback, trying to understand why my game went so poorly. The response I got was “your game is not fun at all and lack any kind of story. You focused too much on graphics”. I thought it was a bit harsh, but okay. I’m fine with criticism. Then I reached out to a judge (a game dev) that was responsible to rate the top 25 games and asked for feedback as well. The response was completely different, I got “Jesus, this looks awesome! You should’ve be in the top 25” and the rate he gave me would've put me in the top 10 or maybe even top 5! Then I noticed the biggest problem of the jam: > The judges responsible for picking the top 25 has no experience on game development at all, and this completely broke the judging system So all my work focusing on real game development and not AI Slop was pretty much thrown in the trash as this was simply not important for the initial judges All because they just didn’t consider the game fun. Which brings me to another problem: > Fun is subjective I’ve played my game with my wife and we had a blast, and we also played other games that we didn’t find it as much fun. So they decided the results of the game jam that has 50k in prize pool based on their personal experience of fun. I mean, fun is important. But technical depth also should be considered in a game jam. They said that “fun > polish” was the criteria. But this is definitely flawed by the reason above. You can build GTA 6 but if the judge does not like GTA you are discarded. With no regards on the technical complexity of the game whatsoever I’m not here to trash on anyone, I think everyone that shipped a game deserves to be praised. And I think the winners deserved their spot. But the rest was very... questionable. And lots of participants didn’t get the respect they deserved (I've talked to a bunch of them) That’s my take. I'll tag some creators down bellow that should've get more credit

André → andreelias.dev

73,651 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.

Arjun Mahadevan (Mr. LLC 🇺🇸)

37,524 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten