正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

What do you think about this?? Why hasn’t Candace Owens used the same software that she used to make up her mind and convince herself and many of her fans that Emmanuel Macron’s wife is a man. So, is this software as reliable as you touted?? If it is... show more

Nish Perez 🇺🇸🇵🇷

1,260 subscribers

76,718 次观看 • 4 天前 •via X (Twitter)

喜剧教育新闻政治

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Graham: So the question is, for The New York Times," you say that the Durham report says that this was not reliable. They did not say that. So I'm going to ask the FBI and the CIA if this is reliable information. Because if it is reliable, it shows that the plot included the Democrats as early as January of 2016.

Graham: So the question is, for The New York Times," you say that the Durham report says that this was not reliable. They did not say that. So I'm going to ask the FBI and the CIA if this is reliable information. Because if it is reliable, it shows that the plot included the Democrats as early as January of 2016.

Acyn

144,340 次观看 • 11 个月前

"You know, I don't, I have not changed. I really make the movies for myself. I really, really do." Q: "For no one else, or just sort of like what you ultimately want to see in them?" "Yeah, I think so." Q: "As a fan yourself, too? "What I want to see, yeah, like as a, like, you only have the benchmark of yourself. Like, if you ever try and make a movie for someone other than yourself... I feel like you're going to blow it. "Because you can't, you don't know how anyone else is going to feel. So like, you know, you go, 'okay, do I find that emotionally real? Do I find that interesting? Is that the Krypton I want to go to? Is that the Superman I want to see fight?' "You know, those are the questions you ask yourself constantly. And I think once you, if you're constantly answering yes to that, then you'll end up the more, the film will end up being more interesting to you. "And ultimately, the film being interesting to you allows you to make the movie better because you're interested. "If you make it for someone else over a two-year period, you're just going to not give a sh*t at some point because you're just like, 'I don't care. This is not my movie. I don't care about this movie because I made it for someone else.'" Q: "I imagine that's a very hard thing to do in Hollywood, though, is to keep your vision clear with so much collaboration, with so much going on, with so many other people in the mix." "It really depends on the project. For instance, it was hard on Guardians, you know, where I feel like what ended up happening on that movie was people, we did end up, they did end up asking me like, 'this is for kids, right?' "And I got to honestly say that I knew it was for kids, but I didn't want to make it for kids. You know what I mean? And I think that's what happened to that movie. It did get like second guessed at the end and turned more into a movie for kids. "My point of view is I can think like a child if I want. I have that enthusiasm for movies and what I think is cool. You, the collective you, don't need to try and second guess me and go, 'this is what we think a kid would like.' "And then it's like, 'oh, a song' or whatever. Then you're just like, 'okay, whatever.'"

"You know, I don't, I have not changed. I really make the movies for myself. I really, really do." Q: "For no one else, or just sort of like what you ultimately want to see in them?" "Yeah, I think so." Q: "As a fan yourself, too? "What I want to see, yeah, like as a, like, you only have the benchmark of yourself. Like, if you ever try and make a movie for someone other than yourself... I feel like you're going to blow it. "Because you can't, you don't know how anyone else is going to feel. So like, you know, you go, 'okay, do I find that emotionally real? Do I find that interesting? Is that the Krypton I want to go to? Is that the Superman I want to see fight?' "You know, those are the questions you ask yourself constantly. And I think once you, if you're constantly answering yes to that, then you'll end up the more, the film will end up being more interesting to you. "And ultimately, the film being interesting to you allows you to make the movie better because you're interested. "If you make it for someone else over a two-year period, you're just going to not give a sh*t at some point because you're just like, 'I don't care. This is not my movie. I don't care about this movie because I made it for someone else.'" Q: "I imagine that's a very hard thing to do in Hollywood, though, is to keep your vision clear with so much collaboration, with so much going on, with so many other people in the mix." "It really depends on the project. For instance, it was hard on Guardians, you know, where I feel like what ended up happening on that movie was people, we did end up, they did end up asking me like, 'this is for kids, right?' "And I got to honestly say that I knew it was for kids, but I didn't want to make it for kids. You know what I mean? And I think that's what happened to that movie. It did get like second guessed at the end and turned more into a movie for kids. "My point of view is I can think like a child if I want. I have that enthusiasm for movies and what I think is cool. You, the collective you, don't need to try and second guess me and go, 'this is what we think a kid would like.' "And then it's like, 'oh, a song' or whatever. Then you're just like, 'okay, whatever.'"

Zack Snyder Film

334,960 次观看 • 7 个月前

HOLY CRAP! Graham Allen CHALLENGED Candace Owens to CALL HIM OUT on "lies" from this interview where he debunked MANY of her claims: "Call us on it, Candace. We DARE you. What is the truth? Is it feelings?" "Is it just saying whatever you have to say to make the money that you wanna make?" When the truth comes out, everyone should keep in mind that the Bible says very specific things about widows and what happens to those who attack them. "No one has felt the brunt of this more than Charlie's widow, Erika Kirk, and his children." "So we finally started to decide, how would Candace put it- asking questions about the very people that are just asking questions." Buckle up!

HOLY CRAP! Graham Allen CHALLENGED Candace Owens to CALL HIM OUT on "lies" from this interview where he debunked MANY of her claims: "Call us on it, Candace. We DARE you. What is the truth? Is it feelings?" "Is it just saying whatever you have to say to make the money that you wanna make?" When the truth comes out, everyone should keep in mind that the Bible says very specific things about widows and what happens to those who attack them. "No one has felt the brunt of this more than Charlie's widow, Erika Kirk, and his children." "So we finally started to decide, how would Candace put it- asking questions about the very people that are just asking questions." Buckle up!

Gunther Eagleman™

153,243 次观看 • 4 个月前

#WATCH | Mumbai, Maharashtra: On the Jevons paradox and software demand expansion, Neelkanth Mishra, Executive Director Designate of the World Bank, says, “…If you think about what the major cost of a software firm is, it is people. So, if the writing of software is getting automated, those firms will be the first to make adjustments. But on the whole, it seems that the Jevons paradox—which dictates that as the cost of writing software falls, the amount of software written goes up—is actually playing out. If an XYZ company, which is a product company, was spending, say, $100 million on writing software and can now do it for $70 million, they might need to lay off some people; that is their business priority. But if the amount of software written goes up three to four times, the number of software engineers in the ecosystem will not change… This panic and paranoia about massive job losses is something that I think is, at this stage, unfounded.”

#WATCH | Mumbai, Maharashtra: On the Jevons paradox and software demand expansion, Neelkanth Mishra, Executive Director Designate of the World Bank, says, “…If you think about what the major cost of a software firm is, it is people. So, if the writing of software is getting automated, those firms will be the first to make adjustments. But on the whole, it seems that the Jevons paradox—which dictates that as the cost of writing software falls, the amount of software written goes up—is actually playing out. If an XYZ company, which is a product company, was spending, say, $100 million on writing software and can now do it for $70 million, they might need to lay off some people; that is their business priority. But if the amount of software written goes up three to four times, the number of software engineers in the ecosystem will not change… This panic and paranoia about massive job losses is something that I think is, at this stage, unfounded.”

ANI

114,594 次观看 • 17 天前

Sahil Bloom reveals to make $1,000,000/year you NEED to create $10,000,000 of value for others “To earn $1,000,000/year, you have to create $10,000,000 a year of value. And if you do that, you actually probably will in some way. Like you'll probably capture enough of that value to make that money. But like value creation is what making money is about. The recipe for making a whole lot of money is not that difficult. It is just create value and then receive value. And creating value is just identifying problems, creating solutions, and then scaling those solutions. At all points in time, if you're trying to make money, you need to be doing one of those.”

Sahil Bloom reveals to make $1,000,000/year you NEED to create $10,000,000 of value for others “To earn $1,000,000/year, you have to create $10,000,000 a year of value. And if you do that, you actually probably will in some way. Like you'll probably capture enough of that value to make that money. But like value creation is what making money is about. The recipe for making a whole lot of money is not that difficult. It is just create value and then receive value. And creating value is just identifying problems, creating solutions, and then scaling those solutions. At all points in time, if you're trying to make money, you need to be doing one of those.”

The Iced Coffee Hour

12,895 次观看 • 1 个月前

"One of the challenging things about the really important stuff in life is that they’re endless battles. If you do a good job focusing today and prioritizing today, if you pick the right thing to focus on, it earns you no bonus points for tomorrow. Tomorrow you show up, and if you spend all that time on YouTube or getting distracted or whatever, that day is gone. Other things are like that, too. Just because you worked out two weeks ago doesn’t mean you don’t need to do it today. Or just because you were a good spouse yesterday, that earns you no bonus points for today. You still need to show up for them. And so I’m trying to get comfortable with the endless nature of those things. A lot of the time we try to resist the endless nature of that stuff. “Oh, I wish it wasn’t that way.” We try to convince ourselves that it’s like a finish line. “If I just do this 21-day cleanse, then I’ll be a healthy person and I won’t have to think about it anymore. If I just buy her something nice for her anniversary, then I can stop worrying about it and I don’t have to [do other things].” No, it’s not like that. It’s endless. As soon as you accept the endless nature, you start looking at it differently. You say, “Okay, it’s not about getting to a particular finish line; it’s about living a daily life that feels sustainable and that I like and that I’m fully engaged in. So it’s about liking my days." James Clear on The Knowledge Project

"One of the challenging things about the really important stuff in life is that they’re endless battles. If you do a good job focusing today and prioritizing today, if you pick the right thing to focus on, it earns you no bonus points for tomorrow. Tomorrow you show up, and if you spend all that time on YouTube or getting distracted or whatever, that day is gone. Other things are like that, too. Just because you worked out two weeks ago doesn’t mean you don’t need to do it today. Or just because you were a good spouse yesterday, that earns you no bonus points for today. You still need to show up for them. And so I’m trying to get comfortable with the endless nature of those things. A lot of the time we try to resist the endless nature of that stuff. “Oh, I wish it wasn’t that way.” We try to convince ourselves that it’s like a finish line. “If I just do this 21-day cleanse, then I’ll be a healthy person and I won’t have to think about it anymore. If I just buy her something nice for her anniversary, then I can stop worrying about it and I don’t have to [do other things].” No, it’s not like that. It’s endless. As soon as you accept the endless nature, you start looking at it differently. You say, “Okay, it’s not about getting to a particular finish line; it’s about living a daily life that feels sustainable and that I like and that I’m fully engaged in. So it’s about liking my days." James Clear on The Knowledge Project

Shane Parrish

85,858 次观看 • 6 个月前

This woman is being roasted for the idea that if she’s asked out on a date, that it’s the man’s job to pay for her food. If he asks her out for drinks and she goes, is he automatically responsible for feeding her as well? Is it the idea of spending her own money that she’s opposed to? Even if he just wants drinks and conversation, would it be that bad for her to pay for a snack, she could even extend it further by offering to buy him something to eat too, that would make for a good impression. So if you are out for drinks, are you going to starve if the other person doesn’t buy it for you or are you secure enough to get something for yourself?

This woman is being roasted for the idea that if she’s asked out on a date, that it’s the man’s job to pay for her food. If he asks her out for drinks and she goes, is he automatically responsible for feeding her as well? Is it the idea of spending her own money that she’s opposed to? Even if he just wants drinks and conversation, would it be that bad for her to pay for a snack, she could even extend it further by offering to buy him something to eat too, that would make for a good impression. So if you are out for drinks, are you going to starve if the other person doesn’t buy it for you or are you secure enough to get something for yourself?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

53,001 次观看 • 4 个月前

Josh Safdie asked Tyler, The Creator if his creative process as an actor is the same in his other creations: “[...] you built that blueprint for me to jump off of. And I just tried to give it the right care that I would if you gave me a color palette and I had to make you a hat and a sweater and figure out what that look was. The same love and passion went into that”, Tyler said.

Josh Safdie asked Tyler, The Creator if his creative process as an actor is the same in his other creations: “[...] you built that blueprint for me to jump off of. And I just tried to give it the right care that I would if you gave me a color palette and I had to make you a hat and a sweater and figure out what that look was. The same love and passion went into that”, Tyler said.

Archive Tyler, The Creator

561,523 次观看 • 7 个月前

She says a make up is for old people or old ladies, not young and fresh girls She then gives an example of that, you can't build a new house today, then after a few days you start renovating it to make it look more fresh. You only renovate something that is in a bad condition just like their skin as it's full if wrinkles

She says a make up is for old people or old ladies, not young and fresh girls She then gives an example of that, you can't build a new house today, then after a few days you start renovating it to make it look more fresh. You only renovate something that is in a bad condition just like their skin as it's full if wrinkles

SA🇿🇦 FIRST BEFORE AFRICA🌍

50,376 次观看 • 7 个月前

This is absolutely fantastic. Well worth the watch. Candace spent months telling her audience that Face++ was an incredibly accurate facial-recognition tool—so reliable that she used it to argue Brigitte Macron wasn’t even the same person in old photos. Then she insisted that a lack of evidence or unanswered questions proved her theory. So this woman simply took Candace’s own standards, ran the FBI photos through the exact same software Candace praised, and asked one question: If you trusted it then, why won’t you trust it now? It’s hard to dismiss your own methodology when someone else uses it against you.

This is absolutely fantastic. Well worth the watch. Candace spent months telling her audience that Face++ was an incredibly accurate facial-recognition tool—so reliable that she used it to argue Brigitte Macron wasn’t even the same person in old photos. Then she insisted that a lack of evidence or unanswered questions proved her theory. So this woman simply took Candace’s own standards, ran the FBI photos through the exact same software Candace praised, and asked one question: If you trusted it then, why won’t you trust it now? It’s hard to dismiss your own methodology when someone else uses it against you.

Natalie Jean Beisner

35,965 次观看 • 4 天前

“I made that statement, and the White House hasn’t disputed it!” “The silence on things that are just so easy to respond to. Like if someone messaged me and said, ‘hey Candace, we heard that back when you were working in New York City that you had keys to a white house and you were ushering in models,’ I’d be like, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about. This is not true.’ Erika’s not doing that!” One thing Candace hates more than anything else—even more than people laughing at or making jokes about her—is when big-name people ignore her. She CANNOT STAND that Erika is currently ignoring her and won’t respond to questions any longer, just like she has never been able to stand that the White House didn’t make a statement on her allegations that the Macrons took a hit out on her life as well as the fact that Trump hasn’t said anything about the Macrons suing her She can’t stand it. She tries to paint their silence as evidence of their guilt (because that’s just how dishonest and manipulative she is), but you can tell it’s eating her up inside by the way she references it over and over and over again for weeks and months now.

“I made that statement, and the White House hasn’t disputed it!” “The silence on things that are just so easy to respond to. Like if someone messaged me and said, ‘hey Candace, we heard that back when you were working in New York City that you had keys to a white house and you were ushering in models,’ I’d be like, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about. This is not true.’ Erika’s not doing that!” One thing Candace hates more than anything else—even more than people laughing at or making jokes about her—is when big-name people ignore her. She CANNOT STAND that Erika is currently ignoring her and won’t respond to questions any longer, just like she has never been able to stand that the White House didn’t make a statement on her allegations that the Macrons took a hit out on her life as well as the fact that Trump hasn’t said anything about the Macrons suing her She can’t stand it. She tries to paint their silence as evidence of their guilt (because that’s just how dishonest and manipulative she is), but you can tell it’s eating her up inside by the way she references it over and over and over again for weeks and months now.

Natalie Jean Beisner

29,735 次观看 • 4 个月前

Today Candace shared more old private text messages from Charlie—including one where Charlie allegedly texted Candace that Ben “views you as my slave.” Candace says: “It is just a fact that Ben Shapiro did a lot of things behind the scenes to stop the rise of Charlie Kirk.” Two things on this: number 1–I’m asking again why Candace went on to work for Ben Shapiro? If Charlie was her BFF, and Ben tried to not only pull Charlie away from her but also tried to thwart Charlie’s success, why did Candace go on to work for Ben for years? What kind of loyalty is that to your BFF? Did Candace just want the money and fame it brought? Was there some subsequent reconciliation between all three that Candace is conveniently leaving out, or is she just a really crappy friend? And number 2—what does this have to do with who murdered Charlie? It has NOTHING to do with it. It’s petty drama and gossip. It’s not what Charlie would’ve engaged in publicly or wanted. If Candace actually was sincere in this “investigation,” she’d be sidetracked by nothing and ignoring anything that doesn’t bring her closer to “the truth.” And if she were a Christian, she’d be turning the other cheek.

Today Candace shared more old private text messages from Charlie—including one where Charlie allegedly texted Candace that Ben “views you as my slave.” Candace says: “It is just a fact that Ben Shapiro did a lot of things behind the scenes to stop the rise of Charlie Kirk.” Two things on this: number 1–I’m asking again why Candace went on to work for Ben Shapiro? If Charlie was her BFF, and Ben tried to not only pull Charlie away from her but also tried to thwart Charlie’s success, why did Candace go on to work for Ben for years? What kind of loyalty is that to your BFF? Did Candace just want the money and fame it brought? Was there some subsequent reconciliation between all three that Candace is conveniently leaving out, or is she just a really crappy friend? And number 2—what does this have to do with who murdered Charlie? It has NOTHING to do with it. It’s petty drama and gossip. It’s not what Charlie would’ve engaged in publicly or wanted. If Candace actually was sincere in this “investigation,” she’d be sidetracked by nothing and ignoring anything that doesn’t bring her closer to “the truth.” And if she were a Christian, she’d be turning the other cheek.

Natalie Jean Beisner

76,805 次观看 • 8 个月前

I do not understand this fantasy of making someone constantly happy. You are a grown woman. Your emotional state is your responsibility. If you need a handler to regulate your happiness, then that is your weakness, not his failure. Every time I hear the word “provider” thrown at a man, I ask the obvious question: Provide what exactly, and how much is enough? A roof? Money? Attention? Validation? Endless reassurance? At what point does it stop—or does it ever? This woman sits there waiting for a man to manufacture her happiness like he is a factory and she is entitled to the product. As if she is incapable of building a life she enjoys without outsourcing her emotional stability. She wants joy delivered on a silver platter and calls it love. That is not love. That is dependency dressed up as romance. If you cannot create your own happiness, you are not looking for a partner. You are looking for a caretaker.

I do not understand this fantasy of making someone constantly happy. You are a grown woman. Your emotional state is your responsibility. If you need a handler to regulate your happiness, then that is your weakness, not his failure. Every time I hear the word “provider” thrown at a man, I ask the obvious question: Provide what exactly, and how much is enough? A roof? Money? Attention? Validation? Endless reassurance? At what point does it stop—or does it ever? This woman sits there waiting for a man to manufacture her happiness like he is a factory and she is entitled to the product. As if she is incapable of building a life she enjoys without outsourcing her emotional stability. She wants joy delivered on a silver platter and calls it love. That is not love. That is dependency dressed up as romance. If you cannot create your own happiness, you are not looking for a partner. You are looking for a caretaker.

Larry Conger 🇺🇸

31,096 次观看 • 4 个月前

Steve Harvey reveals the $10 to $1,000,000 formula “Stop trying to think of how to be a millionaire, because you know how hard that is. If you could think of a way to be a millionaire, wouldn't you do it by Monday?” “What is it that you do that somebody would be willing to give you $10 for? Because everybody has that” “If you babysit, somebody will give you $10. If you cut hair, somebody will give you $10. If you write papers for people, somebody will give you $10” “Everybody got something they can do for $10” “Go do that and make $10. Now if you make the $10, do it 10 more times. You know what you got, $100” “If you make $100, do it 10 more times, you got $1,000. Now if you make $1,000, do it 10 more times, you now have $10,000” “Whatever you did to make $10,000 is simple. All you've got to do is do it 10 more times. Guess what? You have $100,000” “You ain't got to change nothing. All you got to do is take your $10 idea. Stop trying to think of how to make a million and just figure out how to make $10” “After you make $100,000 you have to hire some people. But whatever you did to make $100,000 do it 10 more times” “I have a surprise for you, you have just made $1 million with a $10 idea. If you do that, anybody can be successful”

Steve Harvey reveals the $10 to $1,000,000 formula “Stop trying to think of how to be a millionaire, because you know how hard that is. If you could think of a way to be a millionaire, wouldn't you do it by Monday?” “What is it that you do that somebody would be willing to give you $10 for? Because everybody has that” “If you babysit, somebody will give you $10. If you cut hair, somebody will give you $10. If you write papers for people, somebody will give you $10” “Everybody got something they can do for $10” “Go do that and make $10. Now if you make the $10, do it 10 more times. You know what you got, $100” “If you make $100, do it 10 more times, you got $1,000. Now if you make $1,000, do it 10 more times, you now have $10,000” “Whatever you did to make $10,000 is simple. All you've got to do is do it 10 more times. Guess what? You have $100,000” “You ain't got to change nothing. All you got to do is take your $10 idea. Stop trying to think of how to make a million and just figure out how to make $10” “After you make $100,000 you have to hire some people. But whatever you did to make $100,000 do it 10 more times” “I have a surprise for you, you have just made $1 million with a $10 idea. If you do that, anybody can be successful”

dank

428,560 次观看 • 1 个月前

Two years ago today, Elon Musk introduced xAI with these words: “The overarching goal of xAI is to build a good AGI with the purpose of trying to understand the universe. I think the safest AI, the safest way to build an AI is actually make one that is maximally curious and truth seeking. So you go for try to aspire to the truth with acknowledged error. Does one ever actually get fully to the truth? It's not clear, but one should always aspire to that and try to minimize the error between what you think is true and what is actually true. My theory behind the maximally curious, maximally truthful as being probably the safest approach is that I think to a superintelligence, humanity is much more interesting than not humanity. One can look at the various planets in our solar system, the moons and the asteroids, and really probably all of them combined are not as interesting as humanity. As people know, I'm a huge fan of Mars, but Mars is just much less interesting than Earth with humans on it. And so I think that that kind of approach to growing an AI, and I think that is the right word for it, growing an AI is to grow it with that ambition. I've spent many years thinking about AI safety and worrying about AI safety. And I've been one of the strongest voices calling for AI regulation or oversight just to have some kind of oversight, some kind of referee, so that it's not just up to companies to decide what they want to do. I think there's also a lot to be done with AI safety, with industry cooperation. I kind of like Motion Pictures association, so I think there's value to that as well. But I do think there's got to be some like in any kind of situation that is, even if it's a game, they have referees. So I think it is important for there to be regulation. Like I said, my view on safety is like try to make it maximally curious, maximally truth seeking. And I think this is, this is important that you to avoid the inverse morality problem. Like if you try to program a certain morality, you can have the, you, you can basically invert it and get the opposite, what is sometimes called the Waluigi problem. If you make Luigi, you risk creating Waluigi at the same time. So I think that's a metaphor that a lot of people can appreciate.”

Two years ago today, Elon Musk introduced xAI with these words: “The overarching goal of xAI is to build a good AGI with the purpose of trying to understand the universe. I think the safest AI, the safest way to build an AI is actually make one that is maximally curious and truth seeking. So you go for try to aspire to the truth with acknowledged error. Does one ever actually get fully to the truth? It's not clear, but one should always aspire to that and try to minimize the error between what you think is true and what is actually true. My theory behind the maximally curious, maximally truthful as being probably the safest approach is that I think to a superintelligence, humanity is much more interesting than not humanity. One can look at the various planets in our solar system, the moons and the asteroids, and really probably all of them combined are not as interesting as humanity. As people know, I'm a huge fan of Mars, but Mars is just much less interesting than Earth with humans on it. And so I think that that kind of approach to growing an AI, and I think that is the right word for it, growing an AI is to grow it with that ambition. I've spent many years thinking about AI safety and worrying about AI safety. And I've been one of the strongest voices calling for AI regulation or oversight just to have some kind of oversight, some kind of referee, so that it's not just up to companies to decide what they want to do. I think there's also a lot to be done with AI safety, with industry cooperation. I kind of like Motion Pictures association, so I think there's value to that as well. But I do think there's got to be some like in any kind of situation that is, even if it's a game, they have referees. So I think it is important for there to be regulation. Like I said, my view on safety is like try to make it maximally curious, maximally truth seeking. And I think this is, this is important that you to avoid the inverse morality problem. Like if you try to program a certain morality, you can have the, you, you can basically invert it and get the opposite, what is sometimes called the Waluigi problem. If you make Luigi, you risk creating Waluigi at the same time. So I think that's a metaphor that a lot of people can appreciate.”

ELON CLIPS

21,519 次观看 • 1 年前

A lady sent me this video. She was angry with what she heard. I checked the responses on IG, and women were not pleased. No wonder Ife didn't post this on X. I like to know what you think about the video. . . . I'll summarise their displeasure below. 1. Ethics. Just because you have money and audacity, does not make it ethical. Surrogacy exists as a means to help women going through fertility issues. It is not a way for rich women to shop for babies. There actually have to be a medical reason you are using surrogacy, to prevent abuse. To do otherwise could easily lead to exploitation and baby farming. 2. Economics of supply and demand. If surrogacy becomes something that only the rich can afford, the price would shoot up, and it would no longer be accessible to women who need it. Surrogacy is not a luxury item that the rich should buy just because... 3. She is 40 She intentionally skipped the part that she is 40 and geriatric. She is hiding the danger of her carrying pregnancy to term under "you dont owe anybody explanation. If you can afford it, do it. People hate that a woman can choose. They hate the audacity." This is a consolatory lie. Honesty is not that hard. The pregnancy is high risk, but she is desperately painting it as her choice. 4. Exploitation Women's womb should not be rented just because. It is a moral and ethical issue. The carrier need to feel she is helping out a family who cannot have kid of their own. It is a humanitarian issue, not business. If we agree that pregnancy itself can be life threatening if complications arise, then the least that should happen is that, it arose through empathy doing good for another woman, not something ticked off the market list of the bourgeoisie. . . . I'm just here to compare note. Do you agree it should be strictly business or regulated by ethics?

A lady sent me this video. She was angry with what she heard. I checked the responses on IG, and women were not pleased. No wonder Ife didn't post this on X. I like to know what you think about the video. . . . I'll summarise their displeasure below. 1. Ethics. Just because you have money and audacity, does not make it ethical. Surrogacy exists as a means to help women going through fertility issues. It is not a way for rich women to shop for babies. There actually have to be a medical reason you are using surrogacy, to prevent abuse. To do otherwise could easily lead to exploitation and baby farming. 2. Economics of supply and demand. If surrogacy becomes something that only the rich can afford, the price would shoot up, and it would no longer be accessible to women who need it. Surrogacy is not a luxury item that the rich should buy just because... 3. She is 40 She intentionally skipped the part that she is 40 and geriatric. She is hiding the danger of her carrying pregnancy to term under "you dont owe anybody explanation. If you can afford it, do it. People hate that a woman can choose. They hate the audacity." This is a consolatory lie. Honesty is not that hard. The pregnancy is high risk, but she is desperately painting it as her choice. 4. Exploitation Women's womb should not be rented just because. It is a moral and ethical issue. The carrier need to feel she is helping out a family who cannot have kid of their own. It is a humanitarian issue, not business. If we agree that pregnancy itself can be life threatening if complications arise, then the least that should happen is that, it arose through empathy doing good for another woman, not something ticked off the market list of the bourgeoisie. . . . I'm just here to compare note. Do you agree it should be strictly business or regulated by ethics?

Sir Dickson

604,482 次观看 • 1 年前

ELON: MAXIMIZE YOUR USEFULNESS “Generally, just try to make a good product or service. It's really that. You have to say, what is a useful thing that you could do? Maximize your usefulness. If you want to make the best beef jerky, just go ahead and do it. First of all, you need to make sure it is, in fact, the best beef jerky. And then, you just need to explain to people why it is. And so, if you have both the reality and the perception of something being the best beef jerky, or whatever the product may be, then I think you'll find it to be very successful.” Source: Philadelphia, October 2024

ELON: MAXIMIZE YOUR USEFULNESS “Generally, just try to make a good product or service. It's really that. You have to say, what is a useful thing that you could do? Maximize your usefulness. If you want to make the best beef jerky, just go ahead and do it. First of all, you need to make sure it is, in fact, the best beef jerky. And then, you just need to explain to people why it is. And so, if you have both the reality and the perception of something being the best beef jerky, or whatever the product may be, then I think you'll find it to be very successful.” Source: Philadelphia, October 2024

Mario Nawfal

27,809 次观看 • 1 年前

Trump Lies and Says it was NOT Jesus, it was him as a Doctor You really can't make this crap up POTUS: I did post it, and I thought it was me as a doctor and had to do with the Red Cross as a Red Cross worker there, which we support, and only the fake news could come up with that one (that he is depicted as Jesus Christ). So I had just heard about it, and I said, how did they come up with that? It's supposed to be me as a doctor making people better, and I do make people better. I make people a lot better.

Trump Lies and Says it was NOT Jesus, it was him as a Doctor You really can't make this crap up POTUS: I did post it, and I thought it was me as a doctor and had to do with the Red Cross as a Red Cross worker there, which we support, and only the fake news could come up with that one (that he is depicted as Jesus Christ). So I had just heard about it, and I said, how did they come up with that? It's supposed to be me as a doctor making people better, and I do make people better. I make people a lot better.

Ryan Rozbiani

34,966 次观看 • 3 个月前