Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

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

What's better than bukkake blasting a face? Bukkake blasting TWO faces! Double facial on Megumi & Natsumi both get bukkaked! #Urabukkake #Bukkake #Cumsluts #Facial #JAV #Bukkaked #DoubleBukkake #Facials

Urabukkake 120K (18+)

117,345 subscribers

21,738 views • 3 years ago •via X (Twitter)

NSFW #Urabukkake #Bukkake #Cumsluts #Facial #JAV #Bukkaked #DoubleBukkake #Facials

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🚨BREAKING: Three illegal aliens caught blasting guns on packed highway and shooting at family in road-rage attack in Texas have been arrested. Anthony Acevedo and Jose Alarcon-Sanchez were arrested after firing weapons from the Margaret McDermott Bridge on New Year’s Eve in Texas, where police say they recovered more than 100 shell casings. Both face charges of Discharge of a Firearm in Certain Municipalities, a Class A misdemeanor. Acevedo has since been released on bond, while Alarcon-Sanchez remains in custody on an immigration hold. Third man, Anderson Derce Lara, was arrested in connection with a violent road-rage incident. Derce Lara fired multiple rounds into a vehicle occupied by 3 adults and 3 children, the youngest of whom was 3 years old. He faces 6 counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, a first-degree felony. Like Alarcon-Sanchez, he is currently being held on an immigration hold. These are the “hardworking immigrants” leftists are trying to protect, protesting and even wanting to harm ICE to keep them in the country.

🚨BREAKING: Three illegal aliens caught blasting guns on packed highway and shooting at family in road-rage attack in Texas have been arrested. Anthony Acevedo and Jose Alarcon-Sanchez were arrested after firing weapons from the Margaret McDermott Bridge on New Year’s Eve in Texas, where police say they recovered more than 100 shell casings. Both face charges of Discharge of a Firearm in Certain Municipalities, a Class A misdemeanor. Acevedo has since been released on bond, while Alarcon-Sanchez remains in custody on an immigration hold. Third man, Anderson Derce Lara, was arrested in connection with a violent road-rage incident. Derce Lara fired multiple rounds into a vehicle occupied by 3 adults and 3 children, the youngest of whom was 3 years old. He faces 6 counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, a first-degree felony. Like Alarcon-Sanchez, he is currently being held on an immigration hold. These are the “hardworking immigrants” leftists are trying to protect, protesting and even wanting to harm ICE to keep them in the country.

I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸

355,156 views • 5 months ago

“Moonlight Chicken” succeeds for both its art and humanity value, a work that prioritizes emotional truth over spectacle. This series is a contemplation and reflection on love and moral ambiguity, where relationships are portrayed rather through complex negotiations and trade-offs between desire, responsibility, and vulnerability. All the characters face choices in the reality of personal happiness against societal expectations. The aesthetic choices enhance the exploration of human frailty. The cinematography and soundtrack evokes intimacy and nostalgia, and creates a mood that carries due but not heavy emotional weight. Earth Pirapat 🌏 impresses us all with his understated acting. His ability to convey internal conflict through subtle rather than dramatic facial expressions and gestures brings a quiet intensity and emotional truth to the role “Uncle Jim”. A thank-you that comes two years late but strong #MoonlightChicken Noppharnach To watch the full series 🔗

“Moonlight Chicken” succeeds for both its art and humanity value, a work that prioritizes emotional truth over spectacle. This series is a contemplation and reflection on love and moral ambiguity, where relationships are portrayed rather through complex negotiations and trade-offs between desire, responsibility, and vulnerability. All the characters face choices in the reality of personal happiness against societal expectations. The aesthetic choices enhance the exploration of human frailty. The cinematography and soundtrack evokes intimacy and nostalgia, and creates a mood that carries due but not heavy emotional weight. Earth Pirapat 🌏 impresses us all with his understated acting. His ability to convey internal conflict through subtle rather than dramatic facial expressions and gestures brings a quiet intensity and emotional truth to the role “Uncle Jim”. A thank-you that comes two years late but strong #MoonlightChicken Noppharnach To watch the full series 🔗

Panoramist Spotlight

32,861 views • 7 months ago

here's what's actually working in SEO in 2026 vs what's getting people cooked: 1. small sites blasting AI content on their own domain are done. the algo update is sharp — you'll see a euphoric jump on ahrefs, your team will be doing high-fives, and one week later you'll never recover. one article a day max. manually edited. don't blast your URL or you don't come back. 2. content quality is fully commoditized. google can't tell good content from bad anymore so it just defaults to ranking the biggest domain. a blog post on a high-DR site with literally just a title in the body will outrank most of the internet. domain authority is the only tiebreaker left. 3. parasite SEO is the cheat code. listicles on publications you have an in with. facebook groups. reddit threads. quora. medium. linkedin posts. anywhere big that lets you publish — write it, index it, send real chrome traffic to it (google reads chrome data as a ranking signal), and it ranks. 4. AI overviews CTR went from 1% to 2.4% on cited pages. sounds like a recovery. it's not. position one used to get 30% clicks. publishers are still cooked. brands and end users win, everyone in between gets eaten. 5. people freaking out about their search console impressions exploding are NGMI. half of that is bots, scrapers, rank trackers, and chatGPT itself doing a search every time it answers a query. it's not real demand. bonus: starbucks launched a "describe your mood, get a drink" feature on chatGPT. peak NGMI. there are 50 better AI use cases for them — push notifications based on purchase history, revenue optimization — anything other than vibes-to-latte. watch/listen here ↓

here's what's actually working in SEO in 2026 vs what's getting people cooked: 1. small sites blasting AI content on their own domain are done. the algo update is sharp — you'll see a euphoric jump on ahrefs, your team will be doing high-fives, and one week later you'll never recover. one article a day max. manually edited. don't blast your URL or you don't come back. 2. content quality is fully commoditized. google can't tell good content from bad anymore so it just defaults to ranking the biggest domain. a blog post on a high-DR site with literally just a title in the body will outrank most of the internet. domain authority is the only tiebreaker left. 3. parasite SEO is the cheat code. listicles on publications you have an in with. facebook groups. reddit threads. quora. medium. linkedin posts. anywhere big that lets you publish — write it, index it, send real chrome traffic to it (google reads chrome data as a ranking signal), and it ranks. 4. AI overviews CTR went from 1% to 2.4% on cited pages. sounds like a recovery. it's not. position one used to get 30% clicks. publishers are still cooked. brands and end users win, everyone in between gets eaten. 5. people freaking out about their search console impressions exploding are NGMI. half of that is bots, scrapers, rank trackers, and chatGPT itself doing a search every time it answers a query. it's not real demand. bonus: starbucks launched a "describe your mood, get a drink" feature on chatGPT. peak NGMI. there are 50 better AI use cases for them — push notifications based on purchase history, revenue optimization — anything other than vibes-to-latte. watch/listen here ↓

Jacky Chou (buying online businesses up to $1m)

17,360 views • 2 months ago

Qoves, which does scientific facial analysis, reports on “What makes Kim Taehyung so attractive?” He has often been described as the most handsome man in K-pop, and it's one particular standout feature that makes Kim Taehyung, better known as V, so attractive. V's face is notable for high symmetry, impeccable hair, bold brows, dark lashes, a defined mandible border, and exceptionally full lips. You might also notice that his lips are conspicuously pink, that is, that they have more red tone than most men's lips. This is quite interesting, as when researchers Stephen and McKeegan let participants edit faces experimentally, people removed red tones from men's lips to enhance masculinity. But they actually made men's lips slightly redder when asked to maximize attractiveness. In other words, yes, this is a feminine trait, but it's also an attractive one. However, V's standout feature, which you are unlikely to see day to day, is his perfect skin, characterized by homogeneity and even coloration, and also smooth texture. In Matt and colleagues' spectrophotometric intracutaneous analysis, they found that homogeneous skin simultaneously enhances perceptions of youth, health, and also attractiveness. And you can see that we can sample a pixel from almost any part of V's face, and it will be nearly identical to any other part of the face, creating an atmosphere of affection. 🔗

Qoves, which does scientific facial analysis, reports on “What makes Kim Taehyung so attractive?” He has often been described as the most handsome man in K-pop, and it's one particular standout feature that makes Kim Taehyung, better known as V, so attractive. V's face is notable for high symmetry, impeccable hair, bold brows, dark lashes, a defined mandible border, and exceptionally full lips. You might also notice that his lips are conspicuously pink, that is, that they have more red tone than most men's lips. This is quite interesting, as when researchers Stephen and McKeegan let participants edit faces experimentally, people removed red tones from men's lips to enhance masculinity. But they actually made men's lips slightly redder when asked to maximize attractiveness. In other words, yes, this is a feminine trait, but it's also an attractive one. However, V's standout feature, which you are unlikely to see day to day, is his perfect skin, characterized by homogeneity and even coloration, and also smooth texture. In Matt and colleagues' spectrophotometric intracutaneous analysis, they found that homogeneous skin simultaneously enhances perceptions of youth, health, and also attractiveness. And you can see that we can sample a pixel from almost any part of V's face, and it will be nearly identical to any other part of the face, creating an atmosphere of affection. 🔗

Taehyung Naver || 네이버 김태형

22,492 views • 1 year ago

🚀Announcing NeRSemble 3D Head Avatar Benchmark v2 Version 2 of the NeRSemble 3D Head Avatar Benchmark systematically evaluates several aspects of 3D head avatar creation. Our goal is to drive progress toward more realistic, robust, and generalizable avatar methods. 🔬Benchmark Tasks The NeRSemble Benchmark v2 features three core challenges: - Dynamic Novel View Synthesis - Monocular FLAME-driven Avatar Creation (updated) - Single-view 3D Face Reconstruction (new) 👉Explore the online leaderboard and submission system: 🆕What's new? 1. New Task: Single-view 3D Face Reconstruction Given a single portrait image, reconstruct an accurate 3D mesh either showing the input expression or a fully neutral one. Unlike prior benchmarks, the NeRSemble benchmark emphasizes diverse and challenging facial expressions, better reflecting real scenarios. For technical details, see the Pixel3DMM paper. 2. Updated task: Monocular FLAME-driven Avatar Creation We have improved the FLAME tracking that is used for both avatar creation from the monocular videos and avatar driving on the hidden test sequences. The updated benchmark task has: - more stable torso tracking - more expressive lip closures during speech - Improved mouth tracking for challenging facial expressions We hope that these improvements to the benchmark help drive the field forward. 🏆 CVPR 2026 Workshop & Prizes The NeRSemble benchmark will be featured at the CVPR 2026 Workshop on Photo-realistic 3D Head Avatars. Participants in the new and updated tasks have the opportunity to win: - 🎁RTX 5080 GPUs (sponsored by NVIDIA) - 🎤15-minute oral presentation at the workshop ⏰ Submission Deadline - May 26, 2026 Reach out to the amazing Tobias Kirschstein and Simon Giebenhain for more details :)

Matthias Niessner

29,954 views • 3 months ago

Introducing The Godfather... (LinkedIn Edition) It sounds ridiculous but posting on LinkedIn changed my life. When I first started, I was a bit lost. My first startup had just failed and I didn't know what to do next. In the past 18 months, it has unlocked more opportunities than anything I've done in my career. I've hit ~400k followers, bootstrapped a SaaS biz to >$500k ARR and made a ton in brand partnerships. It has been a FORCE multiplier for me and I want nothing more than to help others to get the same opportunities. That's why I built Saywhat. Here's how it works: 1/ Sign up and when you login you'll immediately see your first post (based on your target audience) 2/ Our AI writing assistant helps shape your ideas into posts that people actually read 3/ Get feedback from both our AI and our 600+ strong community (drop your posts in our Roast My Post channel) 4/ Join our monthly live sessions where I create posts live and share what's working right now Plus you get access to our full library of post frameworks, carousel/infographic templates, and a community of people who get it. (Because building a content-led business is brutal...) The results so far are pretty good: - Median user sees 130% more impressions in 90 days - Average user gets an 800% increase - Some users have gone from 0 to 100k+ followers Despite what the haters say, it is still early on LinkedIn. It's a 3-year-old social network living inside a 23-year-old company. The opportunity is massive: - 1 BN+ professionals in one place - Less than 1% post consistently - Even fewer do it well If you've read this far, I have a thank you gift for you 👇 I created a LinkedIn starter pack that includes: - 90 mins of video content - How to define your brand positioning - Content frameworks that actually work - The exact system I used to grow to 395k+ followers and close $500k in ARR Comment "Saywhat" and retweet and I'll send you a link to the free pack. P.S. A massive thank you to Henry Hayes for being a phenomenal collaborator on this video. Your facial expressions made it 10x better! 🙌 P.P.S. if you're a company with >$10m ARR looking for more hands on help to win on LinkedIn, send me a DM

Will McTighe

15,945 views • 10 months ago

The current Second Sphinx Hypothesis Location is a mirror placement to the First Sphinx...🧐🤔 The scan data has been processed through multiple AI systems including Google Gemini and Grok, which returned an 83 to 94 percent probability that the shape is a Sphinx-type monument and a 98 percent probability that the location is archaeologically significant. Proportional diagnostics found the Fibonacci sequence and the golden ratio in the facial geometry, matching the original Sphinx's canonical measurements. A 54 percent probability of a male face was returned alongside a 29 percent probability of female. The nemes headdress is visible in the scan data, and unlike the original Sphinx, which lost its serpent ornament at some point in history, the snake appears to still be attached on the second Sphinx. The proportional mismatch between head and body, one of the most discussed anomalies of the original Sphinx and a central argument in the theory that its head was recarved from something older, appears to be present in the second Sphinx as well, which either means the small-head design was intentional or that both monuments were reworked at the same time from the same original form. The Dream Stela, an inscription placed between the original Sphinx's paws during the New Kingdom, has always depicted two sphinxes facing away from each other, and archaeologists have long dismissed this as artistic rather than literal. The fact that the second Sphinx faces the opposite direction to the original gives that imagery a new weight. Excavation permission has been submitted to the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities. The location is accessible, covered only by a sand mound deposited during 1920s excavations of nearby mastabas, and no significant dig infrastructure would be required. Everything now depends on whether the Egyptian government says yes.

The current Second Sphinx Hypothesis Location is a mirror placement to the First Sphinx...🧐🤔 The scan data has been processed through multiple AI systems including Google Gemini and Grok, which returned an 83 to 94 percent probability that the shape is a Sphinx-type monument and a 98 percent probability that the location is archaeologically significant. Proportional diagnostics found the Fibonacci sequence and the golden ratio in the facial geometry, matching the original Sphinx's canonical measurements. A 54 percent probability of a male face was returned alongside a 29 percent probability of female. The nemes headdress is visible in the scan data, and unlike the original Sphinx, which lost its serpent ornament at some point in history, the snake appears to still be attached on the second Sphinx. The proportional mismatch between head and body, one of the most discussed anomalies of the original Sphinx and a central argument in the theory that its head was recarved from something older, appears to be present in the second Sphinx as well, which either means the small-head design was intentional or that both monuments were reworked at the same time from the same original form. The Dream Stela, an inscription placed between the original Sphinx's paws during the New Kingdom, has always depicted two sphinxes facing away from each other, and archaeologists have long dismissed this as artistic rather than literal. The fact that the second Sphinx faces the opposite direction to the original gives that imagery a new weight. Excavation permission has been submitted to the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities. The location is accessible, covered only by a sand mound deposited during 1920s excavations of nearby mastabas, and no significant dig infrastructure would be required. Everything now depends on whether the Egyptian government says yes.

UFO mania

12,764 views • 12 days ago

🚨To fight digital IDs in the U.S., you must ditch your REAL ID🚨 "The REAL ID is a federal ID masquerading as a state driver's license...the federal gov't has hijacked the state DMVs...according to the law [gov't] can require it for anything...the [DHS] Secretary determines." This clip of Twila Brase (Twila Brase, RN, PHN, Author), author and co-founder of Citizens' Council for Health Freedom, is taken from a discussion with Catherine Austin Fitts (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts) et al. posted to the Children's Health Defense (Children’s Health Defense) Rumble channel on November 13, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- Catherine Austin Fitts: "A REAL ID is something that evolved from an effort to get a national ID at the time of the Patriot Act, and it's been integrated with the driver's licenses in every state. So most people get a REAL ID attached or integrated into their driver's license, correct?" Brase: "Yeah. Although I'd like to say it sort of the other way around. What they have is a real ID, and the federal government is allowing the state to use it for driving. Driving purposes. And so, one of the things I just like to say to get people to understand how this is working is that when you have a REAL ID, the REAL ID is a federal ID masquerading as a state driver's license. People see it looks just like their driver's license before they got a REAL ID, but they do notice that there's a star on it. So it's a— It's a whole masquerading process here which is keeping the American people from understanding what's happening. "And essentially the, the federal government has hijacked the state DMVs by virtue of the fact that the legislators around the country, have decided to bow to the federal government to give up the constitutional rights and the 10th Amendment rights of the people and the states and hand it over to the federal government. "So the federal government has nationalized identification and driving privileges. Or you could say that they have nationalized identification through the REAL ID and then told the states, yeah, you can use it as a, as a driver's license. We will allow you to use it as a driver's license, but we require it for getting on a plane, we require it for federal buildings, we require it for nuclear facilities. And according to the law, we can require it for anything that we want that the Secretary determines. "And so... It's a federal ID, and it could be a federal ID that you— that would be required for you to open a bank account, to access medical care, to go to college— or rent a hotel room or rent a car or get married or anything, because that's what the law says. The law says that its official purposes include any purpose that the Secretary of Homeland Security shall determine. So any purpose. And right now, the American people don't realize the system that's being set up here. "I think the other thing to understand about REAL ID is that the federal government is creating a facial recognition system for the country through the REAL ID, because the real ID requires a biometric, starting with the face. And so, you know, the idea that the government is going to— has claimed a right to collect and capture the coordinates of your body for their control should be anathema to every American. "But Americans don't realize this. They don't realize that the picture that's being taken is a digital picture for the creation of a facial recognition system. A government facial recognition system where all of people's faces are being put into a database. And I'm going to add here because a lot of people, they go to the DMV and they don't understand the picture that's being taken. They just think it's a picture, right? They don't, they don't understand. But what they do understand is that when they go to fly, they're being asked to stand in front of a camera there. So what I'd like to say about that is, so this whole facial recognition system is being created through the REAL ID and about 56% of the American public have their faces in the government database already."

🚨To fight digital IDs in the U.S., you must ditch your REAL ID🚨 "The REAL ID is a federal ID masquerading as a state driver's license...the federal gov't has hijacked the state DMVs...according to the law [gov't] can require it for anything...the [DHS] Secretary determines." This clip of Twila Brase (Twila Brase, RN, PHN, Author), author and co-founder of Citizens' Council for Health Freedom, is taken from a discussion with Catherine Austin Fitts (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts) et al. posted to the Children's Health Defense (Children’s Health Defense) Rumble channel on November 13, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- Catherine Austin Fitts: "A REAL ID is something that evolved from an effort to get a national ID at the time of the Patriot Act, and it's been integrated with the driver's licenses in every state. So most people get a REAL ID attached or integrated into their driver's license, correct?" Brase: "Yeah. Although I'd like to say it sort of the other way around. What they have is a real ID, and the federal government is allowing the state to use it for driving. Driving purposes. And so, one of the things I just like to say to get people to understand how this is working is that when you have a REAL ID, the REAL ID is a federal ID masquerading as a state driver's license. People see it looks just like their driver's license before they got a REAL ID, but they do notice that there's a star on it. So it's a— It's a whole masquerading process here which is keeping the American people from understanding what's happening. "And essentially the, the federal government has hijacked the state DMVs by virtue of the fact that the legislators around the country, have decided to bow to the federal government to give up the constitutional rights and the 10th Amendment rights of the people and the states and hand it over to the federal government. "So the federal government has nationalized identification and driving privileges. Or you could say that they have nationalized identification through the REAL ID and then told the states, yeah, you can use it as a, as a driver's license. We will allow you to use it as a driver's license, but we require it for getting on a plane, we require it for federal buildings, we require it for nuclear facilities. And according to the law, we can require it for anything that we want that the Secretary determines. "And so... It's a federal ID, and it could be a federal ID that you— that would be required for you to open a bank account, to access medical care, to go to college— or rent a hotel room or rent a car or get married or anything, because that's what the law says. The law says that its official purposes include any purpose that the Secretary of Homeland Security shall determine. So any purpose. And right now, the American people don't realize the system that's being set up here. "I think the other thing to understand about REAL ID is that the federal government is creating a facial recognition system for the country through the REAL ID, because the real ID requires a biometric, starting with the face. And so, you know, the idea that the government is going to— has claimed a right to collect and capture the coordinates of your body for their control should be anathema to every American. "But Americans don't realize this. They don't realize that the picture that's being taken is a digital picture for the creation of a facial recognition system. A government facial recognition system where all of people's faces are being put into a database. And I'm going to add here because a lot of people, they go to the DMV and they don't understand the picture that's being taken. They just think it's a picture, right? They don't, they don't understand. But what they do understand is that when they go to fly, they're being asked to stand in front of a camera there. So what I'd like to say about that is, so this whole facial recognition system is being created through the REAL ID and about 56% of the American public have their faces in the government database already."

Sense Receptor

47,212 views • 8 months ago

💥💥💥💥💥💥 BONGINO: “Nobody recognizes an op better than you, the Bongino Army audience. Nobody, nobody, nobody in the business… And I had said to you, this looks like an op because I know there's a body of work that's being produced by the FBI that over the course of weeks and months is going to become public. You saw some of it yesterday. And it's strange. It was almost like it was TARGETED this op to take out Director Patel right before the big announcement yesterday. So weird… This is OP NUMBER ONE: the Doomers and Black Pillers, these people who pretend to be this is the first op, right? They pretend to be in our tent. They are not. I don't know who's paying them. I don't know if it's allegiance to a candidate they want to run in 2028. Bottom line is they want to destroy the MAGA movement, period, from inside our own tent. The Doomers will go first with a story. Kash is a space alien. The liberal media will then run with said story. Kash is, in fact, a space alien. And then like the next day, a story will come out about something Kash is working on that deeply impacts both the Doomers, who want you to believe nothing is happening, and the liberal media who's worried about what's actually happening. You get it? Hey, am I right or am I right? They both have the same goal, get rid of Trump. They do it from different angles. The Doomers want you to believe nothing's happening. The liberal media is worried about what's actually happening. But they both want to get rid of Kash before said thing happens. Because if it happens, nothing is happening, looks stupid. And when it happens, the liberal media doesn't like it because what was happening was helping them. Is that explained?… You can stick with the Doomer bullshit. You're just going to constantly wind up with scrambled eggs all over your face.” Dan Bongino FBI Director Kash Patel

💥💥💥💥💥💥 BONGINO: “Nobody recognizes an op better than you, the Bongino Army audience. Nobody, nobody, nobody in the business… And I had said to you, this looks like an op because I know there's a body of work that's being produced by the FBI that over the course of weeks and months is going to become public. You saw some of it yesterday. And it's strange. It was almost like it was TARGETED this op to take out Director Patel right before the big announcement yesterday. So weird… This is OP NUMBER ONE: the Doomers and Black Pillers, these people who pretend to be this is the first op, right? They pretend to be in our tent. They are not. I don't know who's paying them. I don't know if it's allegiance to a candidate they want to run in 2028. Bottom line is they want to destroy the MAGA movement, period, from inside our own tent. The Doomers will go first with a story. Kash is a space alien. The liberal media will then run with said story. Kash is, in fact, a space alien. And then like the next day, a story will come out about something Kash is working on that deeply impacts both the Doomers, who want you to believe nothing is happening, and the liberal media who's worried about what's actually happening. You get it? Hey, am I right or am I right? They both have the same goal, get rid of Trump. They do it from different angles. The Doomers want you to believe nothing's happening. The liberal media is worried about what's actually happening. But they both want to get rid of Kash before said thing happens. Because if it happens, nothing is happening, looks stupid. And when it happens, the liberal media doesn't like it because what was happening was helping them. Is that explained?… You can stick with the Doomer bullshit. You're just going to constantly wind up with scrambled eggs all over your face.” Dan Bongino FBI Director Kash Patel

MAGA Kitty

343,606 views • 2 months ago

With the release of Kling AI 2.6, I was eager to put it up against one of its arch-rivals….Google Flow Veo 3.1. I ran four separate tests. First, I tested their ability to generate consistent and stable action shots. Second, I tested camera movement in a crowded scene. Third, I tested their ability to generate consistent facial details and emotion. Fourth, I wanted to see how well they can generated an interaction between two characters. Prompt 1: camera tracking shot, wide-shot. The camera tracks above as two nights ride on horses through a forest. The horses a galloping fast. The camera is tracking the knights from above. Prompt 2: Slow camera push in on a man eating Ramen at a Ramen house in Japan. The alley street is busy with people. Prompt 3: Close-up shot of a man on a sailboat. The man has a scared look on his face. After a short pause, the man says, "I'm gonna need a bigger boat” Prompt 4: Static camera. A man picks up a cookie from a plate and takes a bite. His dog looks up at him; eagerly wanting a bite of the cookie. The man turns, looks at the dog, and says, "no cookies for you mister” Verdict🏆: To be honest, I was surprised by Kling 2.6. While Veo 3.1 outperformed Kling 2.6 in the close-up shot test, it slightly underperformed in every other test. In the Veo 3.1 outputs, objects would randomly appear and camera movements were abrupt or didn’t adhere to the prompt. Don’t get me wrong, Kling 2.6 definitely had its flaws (its audio was quieter and often mismatched the prompt). That said, I was impressed with Kling 2.6 more than I imagined I would be. Although a somewhat small lead, I would give Kling 2.6 the slight advantage for this round of tests.

With the release of Kling AI 2.6, I was eager to put it up against one of its arch-rivals….Google Flow Veo 3.1. I ran four separate tests. First, I tested their ability to generate consistent and stable action shots. Second, I tested camera movement in a crowded scene. Third, I tested their ability to generate consistent facial details and emotion. Fourth, I wanted to see how well they can generated an interaction between two characters. Prompt 1: camera tracking shot, wide-shot. The camera tracks above as two nights ride on horses through a forest. The horses a galloping fast. The camera is tracking the knights from above. Prompt 2: Slow camera push in on a man eating Ramen at a Ramen house in Japan. The alley street is busy with people. Prompt 3: Close-up shot of a man on a sailboat. The man has a scared look on his face. After a short pause, the man says, "I'm gonna need a bigger boat” Prompt 4: Static camera. A man picks up a cookie from a plate and takes a bite. His dog looks up at him; eagerly wanting a bite of the cookie. The man turns, looks at the dog, and says, "no cookies for you mister” Verdict🏆: To be honest, I was surprised by Kling 2.6. While Veo 3.1 outperformed Kling 2.6 in the close-up shot test, it slightly underperformed in every other test. In the Veo 3.1 outputs, objects would randomly appear and camera movements were abrupt or didn’t adhere to the prompt. Don’t get me wrong, Kling 2.6 definitely had its flaws (its audio was quieter and often mismatched the prompt). That said, I was impressed with Kling 2.6 more than I imagined I would be. Although a somewhat small lead, I would give Kling 2.6 the slight advantage for this round of tests.

Curious Refuge

24,695 views • 7 months ago

Finished Pragmata. Genuinely a beautiful experience. A story about the family we choose instead of the one we are given. An inhuman girl on a different world learning what it means to be human, and an Orphan passing on the love his adopted parents gave him by doing the same for her. Certainly a game of the year contender, Pragmata has no fluff, bloat or instances of slow pacing. It offers a unique take on 3rd person shooter combat, blending it with a hacking mini-game that on paper sounds tedious and annoying, but somehow ends up being both creative and fun. Hugh and Diana are two halves of a whole, both in gameplay and the narrative. They don't work without each other, all of Hugh's weapons fulfill different roles inside the sandbox making no two options the same. Diana's hacking mods encourage strategy, quick thinking and moment to moment decision making without halting the fast paced combat. It's a system I don't think we've ever really seen before and the fact that Capcom was able to both make a hacking minigame that's fun instead of tedious and interweave it with real time combat without ruining the pacing, is truly a testament to how much creativity and thought went into the game design. The levels all encourage backtracking, have a ton of verticality and always remain a decent size so sections never drag on for too long, in fact I'd argue some sections of the game could've been longer. The small puzzles around levels or in training are less designed for challenge and more-so to breakup the combat, so you'll never be spending a lot of time frying your brain on any of them. The enemy design is varied and you have to approach all of them differently, using different weapons and hacking mods which are more useful on some than others, and the fact that all weapons (except your primary) and mods have very limited ammo means you'll be carefully considering what weapons/mods you use on what enemy, instead of randomly blasting any you come across with your strongest weapon. There's a good variety of unlockables as well, outfits for Hugh and Diana, new weapons, mods, the stuff you would expect, all the way up until you beat the game which will give you rewards to use in NG+, there's a good amount of stuff to play with and the customization is solid. If I had a few criticisms, I'd say I wish we got at least one more primary weapon and maybe a few more unique looking suits for Hugh, since some of them are borderline color swaps. The story is a fantastic one, character driven rather than plot driven. Hugh and Diana's adopted father/daughter dynamic carries the game on it's back, Hugh guiding and teaching Diana what it means to be human, providing her the small glimpses of joys that earth can provide and giving her the parental guidance and love she never received, just as his adopted parents did for him. It's all about the small character moments between these two. I teared up on multiple occasions, especially the ending which was heartfelt, satisfying and conclusive. Whoever decided that some of the collectibles would just be toys for Diana needs a raise, it might be the most sweet, wholesome collectibles in any game I've ever seen. I found myself wanting to find them just to watch Diana be happy and get her to draw more cute pictures, it's really the cutest thing. The music, art style, visuals, all of it is great though there's only two tracks that really standout in my mind and they both come at the every end. The game is on the shorter side, I did all available content and beat it within 13 hours, but NG+ offers additional content and beating the game unlocks a new mode, so there's still stuff left to do and new toys to play with. The shorter runtime encouraging replayability. This is what we needed, a cool new I.P with creative, innovative mechanics, a heartwarming story in an interesting new world and likeable new characters we all want to root for. Pragmata fucking slaps. 9/10.

Finished Pragmata. Genuinely a beautiful experience. A story about the family we choose instead of the one we are given. An inhuman girl on a different world learning what it means to be human, and an Orphan passing on the love his adopted parents gave him by doing the same for her. Certainly a game of the year contender, Pragmata has no fluff, bloat or instances of slow pacing. It offers a unique take on 3rd person shooter combat, blending it with a hacking mini-game that on paper sounds tedious and annoying, but somehow ends up being both creative and fun. Hugh and Diana are two halves of a whole, both in gameplay and the narrative. They don't work without each other, all of Hugh's weapons fulfill different roles inside the sandbox making no two options the same. Diana's hacking mods encourage strategy, quick thinking and moment to moment decision making without halting the fast paced combat. It's a system I don't think we've ever really seen before and the fact that Capcom was able to both make a hacking minigame that's fun instead of tedious and interweave it with real time combat without ruining the pacing, is truly a testament to how much creativity and thought went into the game design. The levels all encourage backtracking, have a ton of verticality and always remain a decent size so sections never drag on for too long, in fact I'd argue some sections of the game could've been longer. The small puzzles around levels or in training are less designed for challenge and more-so to breakup the combat, so you'll never be spending a lot of time frying your brain on any of them. The enemy design is varied and you have to approach all of them differently, using different weapons and hacking mods which are more useful on some than others, and the fact that all weapons (except your primary) and mods have very limited ammo means you'll be carefully considering what weapons/mods you use on what enemy, instead of randomly blasting any you come across with your strongest weapon. There's a good variety of unlockables as well, outfits for Hugh and Diana, new weapons, mods, the stuff you would expect, all the way up until you beat the game which will give you rewards to use in NG+, there's a good amount of stuff to play with and the customization is solid. If I had a few criticisms, I'd say I wish we got at least one more primary weapon and maybe a few more unique looking suits for Hugh, since some of them are borderline color swaps. The story is a fantastic one, character driven rather than plot driven. Hugh and Diana's adopted father/daughter dynamic carries the game on it's back, Hugh guiding and teaching Diana what it means to be human, providing her the small glimpses of joys that earth can provide and giving her the parental guidance and love she never received, just as his adopted parents did for him. It's all about the small character moments between these two. I teared up on multiple occasions, especially the ending which was heartfelt, satisfying and conclusive. Whoever decided that some of the collectibles would just be toys for Diana needs a raise, it might be the most sweet, wholesome collectibles in any game I've ever seen. I found myself wanting to find them just to watch Diana be happy and get her to draw more cute pictures, it's really the cutest thing. The music, art style, visuals, all of it is great though there's only two tracks that really standout in my mind and they both come at the every end. The game is on the shorter side, I did all available content and beat it within 13 hours, but NG+ offers additional content and beating the game unlocks a new mode, so there's still stuff left to do and new toys to play with. The shorter runtime encouraging replayability. This is what we needed, a cool new I.P with creative, innovative mechanics, a heartwarming story in an interesting new world and likeable new characters we all want to root for. Pragmata fucking slaps. 9/10.

🎮𝙆𝙖𝙞𝙮𝙖🎮

22,966 views • 2 months ago

Oh, dear Creators, buckle up – because this one’s for you. So, let’s talk about this scandal of the century, shall we? Marques Brownlee did something “irresponsible,” and – shocker! – someone noticed. He took it down, apologized, to move on. But you guys? Oh no, you practically set up a research lab to analyze his every frame of a video, ready to pounce on any perceived slip-up. I mean, really, are you that devoted to the cause of nitpicking, or did he just accidentally stumble into the role of your personal life coach? Riddle me this: Why are so many of you itching to catch this guy in a misstep? Could it be… envy? I mean, let’s face it – he’s playing in a league you all wish you could reach. He’s built the stage, the audience, the brands – while you’ve got… well, a magnifying glass aimed at his YouTube channel. And isn’t it wild how he’s out there just minding his business, focusing on his craft, and somehow managing to do it better than all of you? It’s almost as if being successful and dedicated has its perks. Crazy, right? He’s the one writing the playbook, while you’re too busy reading between the lines looking for typos. But let’s not stop there. High-performance cars, tech reviews with a twist, creative experiments – it’s like you’re shocked that exciting, risky content might, gasp, come with a hint of irresponsibility. Yet here you are, clutching pearls over his slip-up like you’re the internet’s moral compass. Meanwhile, car companies are out here blasting ads of reckless racing on windy mountain two way roads in the rain, and somehow, no one’s boycotting McLaren. At this point, maybe MKBHD should just schedule a weekly apology – you know, something generic to keep the internet police appeased. Because, honestly, he’s busy being successful while you’re all busy keeping tabs on his success. Heavy is the head that wears the crown, sure, but heavier is the chip on your shoulder that keeps you looking up, wondering why it’s not you at the top. Your's truly, LeBarron

Oh, dear Creators, buckle up – because this one’s for you. So, let’s talk about this scandal of the century, shall we? Marques Brownlee did something “irresponsible,” and – shocker! – someone noticed. He took it down, apologized, to move on. But you guys? Oh no, you practically set up a research lab to analyze his every frame of a video, ready to pounce on any perceived slip-up. I mean, really, are you that devoted to the cause of nitpicking, or did he just accidentally stumble into the role of your personal life coach? Riddle me this: Why are so many of you itching to catch this guy in a misstep? Could it be… envy? I mean, let’s face it – he’s playing in a league you all wish you could reach. He’s built the stage, the audience, the brands – while you’ve got… well, a magnifying glass aimed at his YouTube channel. And isn’t it wild how he’s out there just minding his business, focusing on his craft, and somehow managing to do it better than all of you? It’s almost as if being successful and dedicated has its perks. Crazy, right? He’s the one writing the playbook, while you’re too busy reading between the lines looking for typos. But let’s not stop there. High-performance cars, tech reviews with a twist, creative experiments – it’s like you’re shocked that exciting, risky content might, gasp, come with a hint of irresponsibility. Yet here you are, clutching pearls over his slip-up like you’re the internet’s moral compass. Meanwhile, car companies are out here blasting ads of reckless racing on windy mountain two way roads in the rain, and somehow, no one’s boycotting McLaren. At this point, maybe MKBHD should just schedule a weekly apology – you know, something generic to keep the internet police appeased. Because, honestly, he’s busy being successful while you’re all busy keeping tabs on his success. Heavy is the head that wears the crown, sure, but heavier is the chip on your shoulder that keeps you looking up, wondering why it’s not you at the top. Your's truly, LeBarron

LeBarron Burton Sr.

154,866 views • 1 year ago

Microsoft just lost $357 billion in a single day... While Meta gained $170 billion. Both companies are spending over $100 billion on AI this year. One got punished. One got rewarded. The difference tells you everything about where this market is heading: Microsoft reported Wednesday. Beat on revenue. Beat on earnings. Revenue up 17%. EPS up 24%. But the stock dropped 10% - worst decline since March 2020. Why? Azure cloud growth came in at 39%. The Street wanted 39.4%. A miss of 0.4 percentage points erased a third of a trillion dollars. Meanwhile, capex jumped 89% year-over-year to $37.5B in a single quarter. CFO Amy Hood admitted two-thirds went to "short-lived assets" - GPUs that depreciate fast. And Microsoft also said they'll remain "capacity constrained through at least the end of our fiscal year." In other words: "We're spending $72B in six months and STILL can't build data centers fast enough." But that's not the real problem... The real problem is what's happening inside Microsoft's spending. They're not just building infrastructure for Azure customers. They're allocating scarce GPUs to their own products: M365 Copilot, GitHub Copilot, internal R&D. Hood said they must "balance Azure revenue growth with growing needs across first-party apps and AI solutions." Microsoft is competing with its own cloud customers for compute capacity. If they'd allocated all new GPUs to Azure, growth would've exceeded 40%. Instead, they're betting their own AI products will generate more value than selling raw compute. That bet hasn't paid off yet. And 45% of their $625B backlog is tied to ONE customer: OpenAI. Now compare that to Meta: Revenue beat. Earnings beat. Guidance crushed expectations. And they announced $115-135B in AI capex for 2026 - nearly DOUBLE what they spent in 2025. The stock surged 10%. Why the opposite reaction? Meta is seeing immediate returns. Ad impressions up 18%. Average price per ad up 6%. Revenue up 24% year-over-year. Their AI investment is already showing up in the core business TODAY. Better ad targeting. Better recommendations. Better engagement. Q1 revenue guidance came in at $53.5-56.5B - Wall Street expected $51.4B. That's 30% revenue growth ACCELERATION. When you have 3.58B daily active users, AI improvements compound immediately. Zuckerberg called it a "major AI acceleration" and Wall Street didn't care about the $135B spending number. Because they can SEE the connection between spending and revenue. Here's what matters: The hyperscalers are now spending over $600B combined on AI infrastructure in 2026. AI assets depreciate at roughly 20% per year. The five hyperscalers face annual depreciation expenses approaching $400B - MORE than their combined profits in 2025. This is the biggest capital spending cycle in history. And we just entered Phase 3, where AI-enabled revenue models must finally prove their worth. The market stopped rewarding spending. It's rewarding RETURNS. Meta showed returns. Microsoft showed constraints and margin compression. That's why we saw a $527B swing between two companies reporting on the same day. My read: The easy money in the AI trade is over. From here, execution matters more than ambition. Companies that can turn infrastructure spending into measurable productivity gains get rewarded. Companies still building without clear payback get punished - even when they beat estimates. Microsoft isn't a bad company. It's a company that bet big on AI infrastructure and is now scrambling to show ROI before margins collapse further. Meta isn't necessarily a better AI company. It just has a business model where AI improvements translate directly to revenue growth. For investors, the lesson is clear: The AI infrastructure phase is maturing. Winners from here will be companies with clear paths from spending to earnings. Not companies asking you to trust the process while margins compress.

Microsoft just lost $357 billion in a single day... While Meta gained $170 billion. Both companies are spending over $100 billion on AI this year. One got punished. One got rewarded. The difference tells you everything about where this market is heading: Microsoft reported Wednesday. Beat on revenue. Beat on earnings. Revenue up 17%. EPS up 24%. But the stock dropped 10% - worst decline since March 2020. Why? Azure cloud growth came in at 39%. The Street wanted 39.4%. A miss of 0.4 percentage points erased a third of a trillion dollars. Meanwhile, capex jumped 89% year-over-year to $37.5B in a single quarter. CFO Amy Hood admitted two-thirds went to "short-lived assets" - GPUs that depreciate fast. And Microsoft also said they'll remain "capacity constrained through at least the end of our fiscal year." In other words: "We're spending $72B in six months and STILL can't build data centers fast enough." But that's not the real problem... The real problem is what's happening inside Microsoft's spending. They're not just building infrastructure for Azure customers. They're allocating scarce GPUs to their own products: M365 Copilot, GitHub Copilot, internal R&D. Hood said they must "balance Azure revenue growth with growing needs across first-party apps and AI solutions." Microsoft is competing with its own cloud customers for compute capacity. If they'd allocated all new GPUs to Azure, growth would've exceeded 40%. Instead, they're betting their own AI products will generate more value than selling raw compute. That bet hasn't paid off yet. And 45% of their $625B backlog is tied to ONE customer: OpenAI. Now compare that to Meta: Revenue beat. Earnings beat. Guidance crushed expectations. And they announced $115-135B in AI capex for 2026 - nearly DOUBLE what they spent in 2025. The stock surged 10%. Why the opposite reaction? Meta is seeing immediate returns. Ad impressions up 18%. Average price per ad up 6%. Revenue up 24% year-over-year. Their AI investment is already showing up in the core business TODAY. Better ad targeting. Better recommendations. Better engagement. Q1 revenue guidance came in at $53.5-56.5B - Wall Street expected $51.4B. That's 30% revenue growth ACCELERATION. When you have 3.58B daily active users, AI improvements compound immediately. Zuckerberg called it a "major AI acceleration" and Wall Street didn't care about the $135B spending number. Because they can SEE the connection between spending and revenue. Here's what matters: The hyperscalers are now spending over $600B combined on AI infrastructure in 2026. AI assets depreciate at roughly 20% per year. The five hyperscalers face annual depreciation expenses approaching $400B - MORE than their combined profits in 2025. This is the biggest capital spending cycle in history. And we just entered Phase 3, where AI-enabled revenue models must finally prove their worth. The market stopped rewarding spending. It's rewarding RETURNS. Meta showed returns. Microsoft showed constraints and margin compression. That's why we saw a $527B swing between two companies reporting on the same day. My read: The easy money in the AI trade is over. From here, execution matters more than ambition. Companies that can turn infrastructure spending into measurable productivity gains get rewarded. Companies still building without clear payback get punished - even when they beat estimates. Microsoft isn't a bad company. It's a company that bet big on AI infrastructure and is now scrambling to show ROI before margins collapse further. Meta isn't necessarily a better AI company. It just has a business model where AI improvements translate directly to revenue growth. For investors, the lesson is clear: The AI infrastructure phase is maturing. Winners from here will be companies with clear paths from spending to earnings. Not companies asking you to trust the process while margins compress.

George Noble

120,233 views • 5 months ago

The verses in "All Out" and "Victory" are both Makaveli's and Biggie's last verses that they ever recorded. They both went out with a bang and executed three incredible verses. Ironically, they both dissed each other in their last songs; Makaveli did it while Biggie was still alive, but Biggie subliminally dissed him in the track "Victory" after his death. That Vic guy, aka the guy who put 50 Cent in the same tier as Pac lyrically, claimed that Makaveli could never write a verse like Biggie's "Victory" verses in a million years. He highlighted Biggie's film references; yes, movie references, wordplay, and a few other things. I can tell you right now that "All Out" clears these Biggie verses when it comes to motif, wordplay, and overall literary device mastery, and he's doing it with more depth/substance, which is generally more difficult to do. Overall, it's more complex than Biggie's verses. The average listener does not understand how deep Makaveli got into his literary device bag in this verse and how well he's using each device. He was very sneaky with it, and he hid things in plain sight. I'll give you an example of what I'm referring to. He's making figurative language appear to be non-figurative at face value, but when you look beyond the surface, it's not. The average listener doesn't have a high understanding of his poetry, and the false narratives make it even harder for them to elevate their understanding because they're severely brainwashed by them. A lot of so-called 2Pac fans are not true students of him and his work, and that has to do with false narratives. Let's remove names, narratives, bias, and personal agendas and only focus on what's being displayed. Let's examine the lyrics on paper closely, carefully, and objectively and breakdown what they're both doing lyrically overall. This has absolutely nothing to do with flow or anything related to the vocal performance of either artist; this is strictly about the lyrics on paper. This doesn't even have anything to do with which track is better or if you like either song by either artist; it's strictly about what they're doing lyrically on paper. I challenge the dope technician Rapsody , “LIVE FROM MIAMI BEACH” OUT NOW! , the suspect 2Pac fan J. Cole and the fake 2Pac fan Joe Budden to get deep into the details with me. I challenge only serious individuals to get deep into the details with me. I have time. Sidenote: Both Biggie and 2Pac were great poets.

The verses in "All Out" and "Victory" are both Makaveli's and Biggie's last verses that they ever recorded. They both went out with a bang and executed three incredible verses. Ironically, they both dissed each other in their last songs; Makaveli did it while Biggie was still alive, but Biggie subliminally dissed him in the track "Victory" after his death. That Vic guy, aka the guy who put 50 Cent in the same tier as Pac lyrically, claimed that Makaveli could never write a verse like Biggie's "Victory" verses in a million years. He highlighted Biggie's film references; yes, movie references, wordplay, and a few other things. I can tell you right now that "All Out" clears these Biggie verses when it comes to motif, wordplay, and overall literary device mastery, and he's doing it with more depth/substance, which is generally more difficult to do. Overall, it's more complex than Biggie's verses. The average listener does not understand how deep Makaveli got into his literary device bag in this verse and how well he's using each device. He was very sneaky with it, and he hid things in plain sight. I'll give you an example of what I'm referring to. He's making figurative language appear to be non-figurative at face value, but when you look beyond the surface, it's not. The average listener doesn't have a high understanding of his poetry, and the false narratives make it even harder for them to elevate their understanding because they're severely brainwashed by them. A lot of so-called 2Pac fans are not true students of him and his work, and that has to do with false narratives. Let's remove names, narratives, bias, and personal agendas and only focus on what's being displayed. Let's examine the lyrics on paper closely, carefully, and objectively and breakdown what they're both doing lyrically overall. This has absolutely nothing to do with flow or anything related to the vocal performance of either artist; this is strictly about the lyrics on paper. This doesn't even have anything to do with which track is better or if you like either song by either artist; it's strictly about what they're doing lyrically on paper. I challenge the dope technician Rapsody , “LIVE FROM MIAMI BEACH” OUT NOW! , the suspect 2Pac fan J. Cole and the fake 2Pac fan Joe Budden to get deep into the details with me. I challenge only serious individuals to get deep into the details with me. I have time. Sidenote: Both Biggie and 2Pac were great poets.

9-FO Tha Negus

24,910 views • 3 months ago

I am the Post-Service Media Placement Coordinator at the Central Intelligence Agency. Office of Technical Service, Building 2A, third floor, end of the hall past the vending machines that only take coins minted before 2004. My job title has changed four times. After the Church Committee we became "Interagency Communications Liaison." After Iran-Contra, "Public Narrative Continuity." After 9/11, "Strategic Transparency." After Snowden, "Community Outreach & Alumni Relations." The job never changed. The job is putting our people on television and making sure the polymer holds under studio lighting. The face is from Jonna's program. She built it in the eighties. Demonstrated one for President Bush in the Oval Office, February 4th, 1993. He said "Show me." She said "I'm already wearing it." The President of the United States could not tell. That was the point. If the President cannot tell, you cannot tell. We have been issuing them to retirees since 1996. Three expressions come standard: Concerned Patriot, Measured Authority, and Reluctant Hawk. Bob chose Measured Authority. The polymer is the same compound we used in Moscow in 1986. It was good enough to fool the KGB at a distance of four feet in winter lighting. It was not designed for high-definition broadcast television. But you were not supposed to have high-definition broadcast television. That was not in the original timeline. People think Operation Mockingbird ended. It did not end. It got a dental plan. In 1977, we had to recruit journalists. Coerce them. Maintain cover. Burn assets when they got sloppy. Carl Bernstein found four hundred of them and published it in Rolling Stone and we spent eleven months on remediation. Remediation did not mean we stopped. Remediation meant we made it look like we stopped. The Church Committee published a report. The report said we would stop. We did not stop. We restructured. Now they apply through a portal. John Brennan submitted his CNN contributor application sixteen days before his last day as Director. I processed it myself. His media training was three sessions. Most of them need fewer. By the time they reach my office they have been speaking to cameras for thirty years. The only difference is the chyron. The chyron used to say "CIA Director." Now it says "CNN National Security Analyst." The mouth says the same words. The words come from the same building. The pipeline has placement agreements with all three networks. Fox gets the military branch — flag officers, Vice Admirals, SEALs. Strong jaw. Prominent brow. Command presence. We match phenotype to audience psychographic. CNN gets the analysts — GS-15 and above, Langley proper, preferably someone who can say "sources and methods" without blinking. MSNBC gets the overflow. We do not optimize for MSNBC. Seventeen former intelligence officials currently hold active television contracts. I placed eleven of them. The network logos on their chyrons cost less annually than a single foreign station chief. The return on investment is incalculable because the return is not measured in dollars. The return is measured in what you believe. Bob's face was fitted in 2017. He was supposed to be National Security Advisor. The White House fell through. He called it a "shit sandwich." Direct quote. It was in the Washington Post. We had already done the molding. OTS does not issue refunds. OTS does not issue apologies. OTS issues faces and the faces go on television and the television goes into your home and you believe the face is a person and the person is telling you what is happening in the world. That is the product. The product is your belief. The face is the delivery mechanism. Anderson's intake was different. He came in as a summer intern in '89. Yale pipeline. We earmarked him for output, not field. He was never going to run assets in Mogadishu. He was going to be the asset that runs in your living room every night at eight. The face is his own. The words were always ours. The internship program has a 340% return on investment measured against traditional recruitment, which requires safe houses and cash drops and extraction protocols and occasionally someone dies. Anderson required a recommendation letter. No one has ever died from a recommendation letter. This is why the program expanded. The face is a known problem. OTS designed the current polymer for field conditions — six hours in a Karachi safe house, a brush pass in humidity, one meeting in a poorly ventilated embassy annex. Not fourteen minutes under 5600K LED panel arrays in a Manhattan broadcast studio. The compound was rated for incandescent. Nobody at OTS anticipated 4K resolution because in 1987 we were still convincing the KGB that a man in a wig was a different man. The technology outran us. Your cameras got better. Our faces did not. I filed nine procurement requests for a polymer upgrade. Form TS-7712. The ninth one referenced the first eight. Nobody responded. The people who approve TS-7712s are on television now. They are wearing the faces I requisitioned for them. They will not approve the replacement faces because the replacement faces would acknowledge the current faces and the current faces are classified and they are classified because acknowledging them would require Legal to review the separation package NDA and Legal spent four years drafting the exclusion clause that allows the faces to appear on television in the first place and they will not reopen it. This is how the system protects itself. Not through conspiracy. Through paperwork. Through seventeen people who cannot fix the thing because fixing the thing requires admitting the thing and admitting the thing is a different form and no one has the clearance to sign both forms. The people on the forums have gotten close. Closer than the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is remarkable because the Senate Intelligence Committee has a $2.3 million annual oversight budget and the people on the forums have a screen recording of a Fox News broadcast and two hours of free time. I filed a containment memo in 2021. It was denied. The stated reason was "public dismissal is more cost-effective than active suppression." Meaning: if the correct answer comes from someone the public has pre-decided not to take seriously, the correct answer functions identically to a wrong answer. We did not invent that principle. We observed it. We have relied on it since 1974. It has never failed. The people who are right are also the people you will never believe. That is not a coincidence. That is the program working as designed. MKUltra got declassified because someone forgot to shred a box in a basement in 1977. One box. Seven thousand pages. Twenty years of non-consensual experimentation on American citizens entered the public record because a filing clerk made a mistake. The face program will never get declassified because no one has ever written it down. I am the documentation. There is no box to forget. There is no filing clerk. There is me, a polymer budget, and seventeen mouths on television saying what we need them to say. My retirement is in nine months. My replacement has not been hired. The posting is on USAJobs. It has been on USAJobs for four years. The clearance requirement is TS/SCI with a full-scope polygraph and "familiarity with broadcast media technical standards." Fourteen people have applied. All fourteen failed the polygraph. Not because they lied. Because they did not believe the questions were real. The questions are real. The faces are real. The program is real. You are watching it right now. Bob is on Fox right now. The polymer is separating slightly above the left ear. I can see it. You cannot see it unless you know. Blaire saw it. That is fine. Blaire cannot issue a subpoena. Blaire cannot convene a hearing. Blaire can post and the post will travel and the people who see it will say "haha he does look weird" and then they will change the channel and the next channel will have another one of our faces and the face will tell them what is happening in the world and they will believe it because the mouth moves and the mouth is confident and the confidence is the product. The program does not have a name. It has never had a name. Named things can be investigated. Named things appear in FOIA requests. Named things get found in basements by filing clerks who do not know what they are shredding. We learned that from MKUltra. We learned that from Mockingbird. The lesson was not "stop." The lesson was "stop writing it down." I am writing it down now. You are reading it. Tomorrow you will not be sure this was real. That is also the program. Not the forgetting. The not being sure. The not being sure is the only thing we have ever needed from you.

I am the Post-Service Media Placement Coordinator at the Central Intelligence Agency. Office of Technical Service, Building 2A, third floor, end of the hall past the vending machines that only take coins minted before 2004. My job title has changed four times. After the Church Committee we became "Interagency Communications Liaison." After Iran-Contra, "Public Narrative Continuity." After 9/11, "Strategic Transparency." After Snowden, "Community Outreach & Alumni Relations." The job never changed. The job is putting our people on television and making sure the polymer holds under studio lighting. The face is from Jonna's program. She built it in the eighties. Demonstrated one for President Bush in the Oval Office, February 4th, 1993. He said "Show me." She said "I'm already wearing it." The President of the United States could not tell. That was the point. If the President cannot tell, you cannot tell. We have been issuing them to retirees since 1996. Three expressions come standard: Concerned Patriot, Measured Authority, and Reluctant Hawk. Bob chose Measured Authority. The polymer is the same compound we used in Moscow in 1986. It was good enough to fool the KGB at a distance of four feet in winter lighting. It was not designed for high-definition broadcast television. But you were not supposed to have high-definition broadcast television. That was not in the original timeline. People think Operation Mockingbird ended. It did not end. It got a dental plan. In 1977, we had to recruit journalists. Coerce them. Maintain cover. Burn assets when they got sloppy. Carl Bernstein found four hundred of them and published it in Rolling Stone and we spent eleven months on remediation. Remediation did not mean we stopped. Remediation meant we made it look like we stopped. The Church Committee published a report. The report said we would stop. We did not stop. We restructured. Now they apply through a portal. John Brennan submitted his CNN contributor application sixteen days before his last day as Director. I processed it myself. His media training was three sessions. Most of them need fewer. By the time they reach my office they have been speaking to cameras for thirty years. The only difference is the chyron. The chyron used to say "CIA Director." Now it says "CNN National Security Analyst." The mouth says the same words. The words come from the same building. The pipeline has placement agreements with all three networks. Fox gets the military branch — flag officers, Vice Admirals, SEALs. Strong jaw. Prominent brow. Command presence. We match phenotype to audience psychographic. CNN gets the analysts — GS-15 and above, Langley proper, preferably someone who can say "sources and methods" without blinking. MSNBC gets the overflow. We do not optimize for MSNBC. Seventeen former intelligence officials currently hold active television contracts. I placed eleven of them. The network logos on their chyrons cost less annually than a single foreign station chief. The return on investment is incalculable because the return is not measured in dollars. The return is measured in what you believe. Bob's face was fitted in 2017. He was supposed to be National Security Advisor. The White House fell through. He called it a "shit sandwich." Direct quote. It was in the Washington Post. We had already done the molding. OTS does not issue refunds. OTS does not issue apologies. OTS issues faces and the faces go on television and the television goes into your home and you believe the face is a person and the person is telling you what is happening in the world. That is the product. The product is your belief. The face is the delivery mechanism. Anderson's intake was different. He came in as a summer intern in '89. Yale pipeline. We earmarked him for output, not field. He was never going to run assets in Mogadishu. He was going to be the asset that runs in your living room every night at eight. The face is his own. The words were always ours. The internship program has a 340% return on investment measured against traditional recruitment, which requires safe houses and cash drops and extraction protocols and occasionally someone dies. Anderson required a recommendation letter. No one has ever died from a recommendation letter. This is why the program expanded. The face is a known problem. OTS designed the current polymer for field conditions — six hours in a Karachi safe house, a brush pass in humidity, one meeting in a poorly ventilated embassy annex. Not fourteen minutes under 5600K LED panel arrays in a Manhattan broadcast studio. The compound was rated for incandescent. Nobody at OTS anticipated 4K resolution because in 1987 we were still convincing the KGB that a man in a wig was a different man. The technology outran us. Your cameras got better. Our faces did not. I filed nine procurement requests for a polymer upgrade. Form TS-7712. The ninth one referenced the first eight. Nobody responded. The people who approve TS-7712s are on television now. They are wearing the faces I requisitioned for them. They will not approve the replacement faces because the replacement faces would acknowledge the current faces and the current faces are classified and they are classified because acknowledging them would require Legal to review the separation package NDA and Legal spent four years drafting the exclusion clause that allows the faces to appear on television in the first place and they will not reopen it. This is how the system protects itself. Not through conspiracy. Through paperwork. Through seventeen people who cannot fix the thing because fixing the thing requires admitting the thing and admitting the thing is a different form and no one has the clearance to sign both forms. The people on the forums have gotten close. Closer than the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is remarkable because the Senate Intelligence Committee has a $2.3 million annual oversight budget and the people on the forums have a screen recording of a Fox News broadcast and two hours of free time. I filed a containment memo in 2021. It was denied. The stated reason was "public dismissal is more cost-effective than active suppression." Meaning: if the correct answer comes from someone the public has pre-decided not to take seriously, the correct answer functions identically to a wrong answer. We did not invent that principle. We observed it. We have relied on it since 1974. It has never failed. The people who are right are also the people you will never believe. That is not a coincidence. That is the program working as designed. MKUltra got declassified because someone forgot to shred a box in a basement in 1977. One box. Seven thousand pages. Twenty years of non-consensual experimentation on American citizens entered the public record because a filing clerk made a mistake. The face program will never get declassified because no one has ever written it down. I am the documentation. There is no box to forget. There is no filing clerk. There is me, a polymer budget, and seventeen mouths on television saying what we need them to say. My retirement is in nine months. My replacement has not been hired. The posting is on USAJobs. It has been on USAJobs for four years. The clearance requirement is TS/SCI with a full-scope polygraph and "familiarity with broadcast media technical standards." Fourteen people have applied. All fourteen failed the polygraph. Not because they lied. Because they did not believe the questions were real. The questions are real. The faces are real. The program is real. You are watching it right now. Bob is on Fox right now. The polymer is separating slightly above the left ear. I can see it. You cannot see it unless you know. Blaire saw it. That is fine. Blaire cannot issue a subpoena. Blaire cannot convene a hearing. Blaire can post and the post will travel and the people who see it will say "haha he does look weird" and then they will change the channel and the next channel will have another one of our faces and the face will tell them what is happening in the world and they will believe it because the mouth moves and the mouth is confident and the confidence is the product. The program does not have a name. It has never had a name. Named things can be investigated. Named things appear in FOIA requests. Named things get found in basements by filing clerks who do not know what they are shredding. We learned that from MKUltra. We learned that from Mockingbird. The lesson was not "stop." The lesson was "stop writing it down." I am writing it down now. You are reading it. Tomorrow you will not be sure this was real. That is also the program. Not the forgetting. The not being sure. The not being sure is the only thing we have ever needed from you.

Peter Girnus 🦅

206,708 views • 1 month ago

The world of writing has changed forever. AI is getting really good, really fast. ChatGPT is already a better writer than most humans and some professional writers. So, what’s the future of writing? 18 thoughts from Tyler Cowen: 1) Don't let AI smooth out your idiosyncrasies. Let your writing stay weird and uniquely yours. 2) Generic content is dying and the burden is on you as the writer to be distinctive. 3) The more personal your writing becomes, the more future-proof it is. Nobody wants to read memoirs from AI, even if they're technically "better." 4) Use AI as your secondary literature when you read — not just for quick answers, but as a thinking companion. As Tyler puts it, "I'll keep on asking the AI: 'What do you think of chapter two? What happened there? What are some puzzles?' It just gets me thinking... and I'm smarter about the thing in the final analysis." 5) Hallucinations aren't the crisis everyone makes them out to be. No matter the source, if you're going to use a piece of information, you should double-check it. This is true for both books and AI. 6) Secrets will become more valuable in an AI-driven world. 7) One way to use AI as a writer is to research fields you aren't as familiar with before you start writing about them. Tyler said: "I just wrote a column about declassifying classified documents. I don't know that law very well. I asked the AI for a lot of background... now I feel like I'm not an idiot on the topic." 8) AI changes what books are even worth writing. "Predictive books and books about the near future. They don't make sense to write anymore." 9) Editing trick: Try running your writing through AI and asking what some people might find obnoxious. It’s a surprisingly powerful editing trick. 10) When prompting AI, put humans out of your mind and imagine you're talking to an alien or a non-human animal. 11) Many of the most significant AI advancements are likely happening behind closed doors. For example, I hear that Google allows employees to use Gemini with virtually unlimited context windows. 12) What possibilities do large context windows open up? Researchers will be able to load entire regulatory frameworks, historical archives, or massive datasets like "tax records from Renaissance Florence" into a single query. 13) The rate of AI improvement matters more than its current capabilities. As Tyler puts it, "This is the worst they will ever be" is key to understanding their trajectory. "A lot of people don't get that. They're impressed by what they see in the moment, but they don't understand the rate of improvement." 14) The best way to appreciate the current rate of improvement is to use the latest models. 15) Being non-technical can sometimes be an advantage when thinking about AI. Here’s Tyler: "If you're not focused on the technical side, you will see other things more clearly... You just focus on what is this actually good for? And not, am I impressed by all the neat bells and whistles on this advance with AI?" 16) How Tyler uses AI to prep for podcast interviews: Don't waste time asking AI for generic interview questions or broad topics. Tyler says that's the worst question you can ask an AI. It’s “too normy.” Instead, ask specific questions about historical examples and get context. Then, let your own creative questions emerge. 17) Your relationship with mentors and peers becomes more crucial, not less, in an AI world. "Two pieces of general advice with or without AI in the world." Tyler says: "Get more and better mentors and work every day at improving the quality of your peer network." 18) The divide between AI and humans creates a striking paradox. As Tyler puts it: "On one hand the AIs are getting so much better, so learn how to use the AIs. On the other hand, the AIs are getting so much better, so invest in these other things that aren't AI—pure networks. You've gotta do both." I've shared the full conversation with tylercowen below. In the replies, I've also linked to a full transcript and relevant links to YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts if you want to listen there. And if you want a bite-size entry to the episode, I've shared some clips in the replies too.

The world of writing has changed forever. AI is getting really good, really fast. ChatGPT is already a better writer than most humans and some professional writers. So, what’s the future of writing? 18 thoughts from Tyler Cowen: 1) Don't let AI smooth out your idiosyncrasies. Let your writing stay weird and uniquely yours. 2) Generic content is dying and the burden is on you as the writer to be distinctive. 3) The more personal your writing becomes, the more future-proof it is. Nobody wants to read memoirs from AI, even if they're technically "better." 4) Use AI as your secondary literature when you read — not just for quick answers, but as a thinking companion. As Tyler puts it, "I'll keep on asking the AI: 'What do you think of chapter two? What happened there? What are some puzzles?' It just gets me thinking... and I'm smarter about the thing in the final analysis." 5) Hallucinations aren't the crisis everyone makes them out to be. No matter the source, if you're going to use a piece of information, you should double-check it. This is true for both books and AI. 6) Secrets will become more valuable in an AI-driven world. 7) One way to use AI as a writer is to research fields you aren't as familiar with before you start writing about them. Tyler said: "I just wrote a column about declassifying classified documents. I don't know that law very well. I asked the AI for a lot of background... now I feel like I'm not an idiot on the topic." 8) AI changes what books are even worth writing. "Predictive books and books about the near future. They don't make sense to write anymore." 9) Editing trick: Try running your writing through AI and asking what some people might find obnoxious. It’s a surprisingly powerful editing trick. 10) When prompting AI, put humans out of your mind and imagine you're talking to an alien or a non-human animal. 11) Many of the most significant AI advancements are likely happening behind closed doors. For example, I hear that Google allows employees to use Gemini with virtually unlimited context windows. 12) What possibilities do large context windows open up? Researchers will be able to load entire regulatory frameworks, historical archives, or massive datasets like "tax records from Renaissance Florence" into a single query. 13) The rate of AI improvement matters more than its current capabilities. As Tyler puts it, "This is the worst they will ever be" is key to understanding their trajectory. "A lot of people don't get that. They're impressed by what they see in the moment, but they don't understand the rate of improvement." 14) The best way to appreciate the current rate of improvement is to use the latest models. 15) Being non-technical can sometimes be an advantage when thinking about AI. Here’s Tyler: "If you're not focused on the technical side, you will see other things more clearly... You just focus on what is this actually good for? And not, am I impressed by all the neat bells and whistles on this advance with AI?" 16) How Tyler uses AI to prep for podcast interviews: Don't waste time asking AI for generic interview questions or broad topics. Tyler says that's the worst question you can ask an AI. It’s “too normy.” Instead, ask specific questions about historical examples and get context. Then, let your own creative questions emerge. 17) Your relationship with mentors and peers becomes more crucial, not less, in an AI world. "Two pieces of general advice with or without AI in the world." Tyler says: "Get more and better mentors and work every day at improving the quality of your peer network." 18) The divide between AI and humans creates a striking paradox. As Tyler puts it: "On one hand the AIs are getting so much better, so learn how to use the AIs. On the other hand, the AIs are getting so much better, so invest in these other things that aren't AI—pure networks. You've gotta do both." I've shared the full conversation with tylercowen below. In the replies, I've also linked to a full transcript and relevant links to YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts if you want to listen there. And if you want a bite-size entry to the episode, I've shared some clips in the replies too.

David Perell

175,011 views • 1 year ago

Is it still daddy? Many of you have shared videos with me recently, depicting young children’s reactions to dramatic changes in their parents’ appearances. Especially in cases where fathers are heavily bearded - then unexpectedly reveal clean shaven faces (which their toddlers may literally never have seen) - the reaction is often one of dismay…which is why I’m typically reluctant to share them. This video - which isn’t nearly as startling - does a nice job of illustrating the child’s perspective here. This father had only a mustache. But you’ll note his son’s apprehensive reaction to its removal. Intellectually he recognizes what’s happened, asking whether Dad has shaved his mustache. But it’s clear that emotionally, he finds the episode a little jarring… even going so far as to ask if “it’s still daddy?” - which is really the crux of the matter in all these videos. Your face is particularly precious to your child. Beginning in infancy, it is a favorite sight. A source of both comfort and learning. And your distinguishing features are part of what make it so familiar to your child. So it’s no surprise that sudden changes in appearance can leave little ones feeling uncertain. This doesn’t mean that you can’t change your facial hair or hairstyle as a parent. But there are definitely more and less sensitive ways to do so. The wrong way, for sure (as seen in many other videos) is to shave a full beard without warning, to cover one’s face with a cloth, and then have a toddler remove it only to reveal that they are being held by (from their perspective) an unfamiliar adult they believed to be their parent. Talk about stranger danger. This dad handles the situation with considerably more tact and with a little older child, but even here there is little question our hero is apprehensive about the change. He’ll adjust quickly… but it’s still an adjustment. How might such a change be undertaken with the greatest sensitivity? First, involve your child in conversation on the front end, over a period of days. Explain why you are considering such a change (it’s hot and itchy, for example) and consider making it gradually, perhaps over the course of a weekend. A thick bushy beard might begin with a significant trim, allowing your child to acclimate in stages to your changing appearance. Better yet, involve your child in the stages of the trimming itself. The end result may still be a little jarring at first, but you’ll be surprised how much a little foreknowledge, involvement, and sense of ownership on may make a difference in their reaction. How have you handled such appearance changes in your home? Any additional tips to share? This clean shaven dad was shared to IG by therealprofessorx.

Is it still daddy? Many of you have shared videos with me recently, depicting young children’s reactions to dramatic changes in their parents’ appearances. Especially in cases where fathers are heavily bearded - then unexpectedly reveal clean shaven faces (which their toddlers may literally never have seen) - the reaction is often one of dismay…which is why I’m typically reluctant to share them. This video - which isn’t nearly as startling - does a nice job of illustrating the child’s perspective here. This father had only a mustache. But you’ll note his son’s apprehensive reaction to its removal. Intellectually he recognizes what’s happened, asking whether Dad has shaved his mustache. But it’s clear that emotionally, he finds the episode a little jarring… even going so far as to ask if “it’s still daddy?” - which is really the crux of the matter in all these videos. Your face is particularly precious to your child. Beginning in infancy, it is a favorite sight. A source of both comfort and learning. And your distinguishing features are part of what make it so familiar to your child. So it’s no surprise that sudden changes in appearance can leave little ones feeling uncertain. This doesn’t mean that you can’t change your facial hair or hairstyle as a parent. But there are definitely more and less sensitive ways to do so. The wrong way, for sure (as seen in many other videos) is to shave a full beard without warning, to cover one’s face with a cloth, and then have a toddler remove it only to reveal that they are being held by (from their perspective) an unfamiliar adult they believed to be their parent. Talk about stranger danger. This dad handles the situation with considerably more tact and with a little older child, but even here there is little question our hero is apprehensive about the change. He’ll adjust quickly… but it’s still an adjustment. How might such a change be undertaken with the greatest sensitivity? First, involve your child in conversation on the front end, over a period of days. Explain why you are considering such a change (it’s hot and itchy, for example) and consider making it gradually, perhaps over the course of a weekend. A thick bushy beard might begin with a significant trim, allowing your child to acclimate in stages to your changing appearance. Better yet, involve your child in the stages of the trimming itself. The end result may still be a little jarring at first, but you’ll be surprised how much a little foreknowledge, involvement, and sense of ownership on may make a difference in their reaction. How have you handled such appearance changes in your home? Any additional tips to share? This clean shaven dad was shared to IG by therealprofessorx.

Dan Wuori

392,534 views • 2 years ago

Peter Weir explains the techniques he employed to make "Picnic at Hanging Rock" (1975) feel unique & disassociated from time & place: "Interviewer: I’ve been surprised to hear of classes of schoolgirls today dressing up and going on Picnic at Hanging Rock picnics: I had the feeling that the film’s point of view was that of an outside observer—almost a voyeur—looking at schoolgirls, rather than coming in any way out of a schoolgirl’s sense of herself. Weir: Films viewed at different times and different places can seem very different—shorter, longer, better, worse, didn’t ever know it was so funny. This film is obviously viewed very differently now from then, and by schoolgirls with a different view from others. It is a simple and emotive series of images that obviously are still going to touch some people, perhaps young schoolgirls in particular. It is often hard to remember what you intended at the time—the more powerful and ingrained memory is the difficulty you face with each project. With much of Picnic at Hanging Rock it was clearly dangerous ground I was treading on, given the audience’s preconditioning, with a mystery that had no solution. I had to supply an ambience so powerful that it would turn the audience’s attention from following the steps of the police investigation into another kind of film. I began some technical experiments (which I continued in 'The Last Wave' (1977)) with camera speeds for example. So within a dialogue scene I would shoot the character talking in the normal twenty-four frames a second, then I would shoot the character listening in forty-eight frames, or thirty-two frames. I would ask the character listening not to blink or make any extreme movement so that you didn’t pick up the slow motion, then I’d intercut those reactions and you would get a stillness in the face of the listener. These things were not discernible to the eye, but you would get this feeling, as you sat in your theatre seat, that you were watching something very different. With the soundtrack I used white noise, or sounds that were inaudible to the human ear, but were constantly here on the track. I’ve used earthquakes quite a lot, for example, slowed down or sometimes mixed with something else. I’ve had comments from people on both 'Picnic' and 'Last Wave' saying that there were odd moments during the film when they felt a strange disassociation from time and place. Those technical tricks contributed to that." (Peter Weir's interview with Susan Mathews, 1985)

Peter Weir explains the techniques he employed to make "Picnic at Hanging Rock" (1975) feel unique & disassociated from time & place: "Interviewer: I’ve been surprised to hear of classes of schoolgirls today dressing up and going on Picnic at Hanging Rock picnics: I had the feeling that the film’s point of view was that of an outside observer—almost a voyeur—looking at schoolgirls, rather than coming in any way out of a schoolgirl’s sense of herself. Weir: Films viewed at different times and different places can seem very different—shorter, longer, better, worse, didn’t ever know it was so funny. This film is obviously viewed very differently now from then, and by schoolgirls with a different view from others. It is a simple and emotive series of images that obviously are still going to touch some people, perhaps young schoolgirls in particular. It is often hard to remember what you intended at the time—the more powerful and ingrained memory is the difficulty you face with each project. With much of Picnic at Hanging Rock it was clearly dangerous ground I was treading on, given the audience’s preconditioning, with a mystery that had no solution. I had to supply an ambience so powerful that it would turn the audience’s attention from following the steps of the police investigation into another kind of film. I began some technical experiments (which I continued in 'The Last Wave' (1977)) with camera speeds for example. So within a dialogue scene I would shoot the character talking in the normal twenty-four frames a second, then I would shoot the character listening in forty-eight frames, or thirty-two frames. I would ask the character listening not to blink or make any extreme movement so that you didn’t pick up the slow motion, then I’d intercut those reactions and you would get a stillness in the face of the listener. These things were not discernible to the eye, but you would get this feeling, as you sat in your theatre seat, that you were watching something very different. With the soundtrack I used white noise, or sounds that were inaudible to the human ear, but were constantly here on the track. I’ve used earthquakes quite a lot, for example, slowed down or sometimes mixed with something else. I’ve had comments from people on both 'Picnic' and 'Last Wave' saying that there were odd moments during the film when they felt a strange disassociation from time and place. Those technical tricks contributed to that." (Peter Weir's interview with Susan Mathews, 1985)

DepressedBergman

65,830 views • 6 months ago

Sensitive content

This barely legal, punk kid Clav (Braden Peters), is being paraded around Israel to promote his “looksmaxxing” content to impressionable kids. What is "looksmaxxing"? It is online so called self improvement practice that advocates for practices including facial "bonesmashing", the practice of hitting your face with a hammer •taking anabolic steroids •using crystal meth as an appetite suppressant. What is Peter’s history with Looksmaxxing? -Peters started injecting testosterone at age 14 -has used testosterone, Accutane, retatrutide (anti-obesity), and nebivolol (treads high BP), and Melanotan 2 to tan faster, -made himself infertile by 2025 due to his body no longer naturally producing testosterone. What crimes as Peters commit to get famous? Feb. 2026: -Peters arrested in Scottsdale, Arizona, on dangerous drug possession, with court documents describing him as carrying Adderall and Anavar, and possession of a forged instrument at a bar, after attempting to gain entry using a fake ID December 24, 2025: -Peters hit a man with a Tesla Cybertruck in Miami-Dade County -Peters then accelerated and ran over the man before asking if he is dead. A woman sitting next to him says, "I don't know," to which he responds, "Hopefully. -Peters live-streamed all of this and kept going on the advice of his kosher handler Adin Ross to go viral Peters then posted an AI-generated photo of himself running over a man in a Cybertruck with the caption, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes." How did gubernatorial candidate James fishback respond? -he tweeted that Peters had done "nothing wrong" by hitting the man with his car. How is Peter’s being rewarded for this degenerative and subversive lifestyle? -He earns more than $100,000 a month from his Kick livestreams. -Guess who controls Kick! How is the humiliation ritual going in Israel while Peter’s hangs out with IDF soldiers? Chabad "outreach figure" Yossi Farro presented Peters with a "custom necklace" which fuse the Star of David with the OpenAI logo. Is Peters in fact a lady’s man despite all of his looksmaxxing efforts which he sells for $50/m? Following his recent trip to Paris, Peters expressed confusion about his lack of success in Paris -he theorized that the French women who appeared uninterested in him were probably "lesbians". -He also admitted on X: "I need to become more interesting so I can carry convos better." Or just go to Israel since they love gays there.

Truth_teller 🇷🇺

76,652 views • 6 days ago

What they don’t tell you when you get older is that you become more selfish, self-centred and less likely to match with someone. So people double down on the self. The Wall is mostly psychological. People focus on the biological aspect with women, but the independence mindset first (“focus on my career”, “I deserve”) is as much if not more a source of infertility than eggs count. If you want to find someone who you are going to build a life with, it is better to do it in your 20s than in your 30s because there is more emotional wiggle room to make space for a person. This goes for both men and women. The way men get it wrong, build yourself and women will come to find you. And you end up with mid 30s looking for clean-up man applicants. You are not as attractive as in your mid to late 20s. And you don’t have that much of a clue of about women, because you focused mainly on your business. So you make a perfect target, for yourself to have an identity collapse from the moment you discover that what you worked hard for all these years was to be a utility only covering for a wife whose only reason she is with you was because you were everything she would not have gone for in her prime. Wasted years, with high exit costs. The way women get it wrong is focus on your career to realise later on they are not gonna be CEOs, but most likely end up at some middle management position making above average income which they start getting tired of it, but in the process built standards and experience portfolio which will make what they would normally qualify for below to what they would feel satisfied with - that they end up resenting the person they are settling for if they find one- even though he would be in her lane. Not mentioning, she carries the baggages of aggregated dating failures during her fun time which is going to hinder her future relationship. And she has to go through dating guys who mostly want her for fucking only, when she does not confuse it with a guy who won’t deal with her rules (product of her being previously used) because he does not want to be seen as provider only. To make it worse, in ever more challenging economic conditions, being with someone to cover the costs of life makes more sense on a society level. However, everyone is becoming more economically fragile. Not only the revenue per head decreased from the doubling of the labour supply, but now it actually creates a double whammy effect, as this creates more distance between the genders stuck in an attrition war that they end up even more emotionally atomised and financially precarious overall. Yet everyone feels the best way to survive is making it on their own. When the people who hold the most power influence and money did it mostly through networks and support systems. It is normie self-sabotage on a massive scale sponsored by normies through social media, so it is even more persuasive. Why need propaganda machines when you can condition the lowest common denominator of people and do the advertisement for you reaching through simpleton messaging. For a pendulum swing to happen few “we thought we knew better but actually did not” generations need to be wasted into irrelevance from adopting these now mainstream narratives (“40 is the new 20”, “why the rush?”) for other generations to change the trend. This is not to say that there are some people who are happy the way things are, but generally speaking, the feeling of belonging happens when you share your life with someone else. And one upping through “I don’t need man/woman” on the public sphere is cutting your nose to spite your face, as a pyrrhic victory to hide the private failure being felt behind closed doors.

What they don’t tell you when you get older is that you become more selfish, self-centred and less likely to match with someone. So people double down on the self. The Wall is mostly psychological. People focus on the biological aspect with women, but the independence mindset first (“focus on my career”, “I deserve”) is as much if not more a source of infertility than eggs count. If you want to find someone who you are going to build a life with, it is better to do it in your 20s than in your 30s because there is more emotional wiggle room to make space for a person. This goes for both men and women. The way men get it wrong, build yourself and women will come to find you. And you end up with mid 30s looking for clean-up man applicants. You are not as attractive as in your mid to late 20s. And you don’t have that much of a clue of about women, because you focused mainly on your business. So you make a perfect target, for yourself to have an identity collapse from the moment you discover that what you worked hard for all these years was to be a utility only covering for a wife whose only reason she is with you was because you were everything she would not have gone for in her prime. Wasted years, with high exit costs. The way women get it wrong is focus on your career to realise later on they are not gonna be CEOs, but most likely end up at some middle management position making above average income which they start getting tired of it, but in the process built standards and experience portfolio which will make what they would normally qualify for below to what they would feel satisfied with - that they end up resenting the person they are settling for if they find one- even though he would be in her lane. Not mentioning, she carries the baggages of aggregated dating failures during her fun time which is going to hinder her future relationship. And she has to go through dating guys who mostly want her for fucking only, when she does not confuse it with a guy who won’t deal with her rules (product of her being previously used) because he does not want to be seen as provider only. To make it worse, in ever more challenging economic conditions, being with someone to cover the costs of life makes more sense on a society level. However, everyone is becoming more economically fragile. Not only the revenue per head decreased from the doubling of the labour supply, but now it actually creates a double whammy effect, as this creates more distance between the genders stuck in an attrition war that they end up even more emotionally atomised and financially precarious overall. Yet everyone feels the best way to survive is making it on their own. When the people who hold the most power influence and money did it mostly through networks and support systems. It is normie self-sabotage on a massive scale sponsored by normies through social media, so it is even more persuasive. Why need propaganda machines when you can condition the lowest common denominator of people and do the advertisement for you reaching through simpleton messaging. For a pendulum swing to happen few “we thought we knew better but actually did not” generations need to be wasted into irrelevance from adopting these now mainstream narratives (“40 is the new 20”, “why the rush?”) for other generations to change the trend. This is not to say that there are some people who are happy the way things are, but generally speaking, the feeling of belonging happens when you share your life with someone else. And one upping through “I don’t need man/woman” on the public sphere is cutting your nose to spite your face, as a pyrrhic victory to hide the private failure being felt behind closed doors.

French OG

12,449 views • 5 months ago