Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

What's the next step change in chip packaging technology? bubble boi: "The main difference between EMIB and CoWoS is CoWoS relies on what we call silicon interposers. They're like these huge plates where you put the chips on, and you start etching channels in between through the interposers." "An... effect of that is that heat dumps into the interposers, just like anyone knows when they heat up popcorn, things expand and contract, and this creates worse yield." "NVIDIA's already seen this. Part of the reason why Blackwell had trouble ramping was all thermals, the package warping. That's a huge issue." "I think even TSMC knows it's a huge issue because in their further along roadmap, they don't really plan on adopting that for much longer. They're now going to a more Intel style thing where you use little bridges... smaller pieces of silicon to connect just the relevant parts." "What that effectively does is cut your costs 'cause you're using way less silicon, the thermals, the communication, it's centralized in one area."show more

MTS

228,864 subscribers

54,062 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Bilim & Teknoloji

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

.bubble boi's new thesis for Intel is all about advanced packaging, which he says is the new Moore's Law: "Up until this point, Intel's thesis was really a fab turnaround." "Now, I've completely changed my logic. It's about advanced packaging. Advanced packaging to me is the new Moore's Law." "You've kind of already seen this with Vera Rubin, where they can't actually do four dies on one package. They had to change that at the last second." "If you look out to Feynman, the packaging of silicon is a huge bottleneck." "It already was a bottleneck. In 2025, Nvidia was 60% of TSMC's advanced packaging. So everyone else was out there to fend for themselves." "So any kind of advanced packaging that comes to market, that allows people to scale compute way more than I think just shrinking a node does. I mean, shrinking a node's great, but the way Nvidia's timeline — and I think all the hyperscalers as well — [has gone], they want more HBM, they want more radical-sized dies, and they all want it in one package." "That's really where things are headed towards, and I think the market's not pricing that in. I think this is a real sea change to the semi industry."

.bubble boi's new thesis for Intel is all about advanced packaging, which he says is the new Moore's Law: "Up until this point, Intel's thesis was really a fab turnaround." "Now, I've completely changed my logic. It's about advanced packaging. Advanced packaging to me is the new Moore's Law." "You've kind of already seen this with Vera Rubin, where they can't actually do four dies on one package. They had to change that at the last second." "If you look out to Feynman, the packaging of silicon is a huge bottleneck." "It already was a bottleneck. In 2025, Nvidia was 60% of TSMC's advanced packaging. So everyone else was out there to fend for themselves." "So any kind of advanced packaging that comes to market, that allows people to scale compute way more than I think just shrinking a node does. I mean, shrinking a node's great, but the way Nvidia's timeline — and I think all the hyperscalers as well — [has gone], they want more HBM, they want more radical-sized dies, and they all want it in one package." "That's really where things are headed towards, and I think the market's not pricing that in. I think this is a real sea change to the semi industry."

TBPN

75,325 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Sequoia’s Shaun Maguire says Silicon Valley is undergoing a "Copernican" shift and waking up to the fact that it revolves around a set of much larger industries, not the other way around: "In Silicon Valley, [there's] almost this Copernican principle — where people used to believe that the world revolved around the Earth, then realized that it revolves around the sun." "There's a Silicon Valley parallel where people think that all of technology, all of industry, revolves around Silicon Valley, but it's actually kind of the opposite." "Silicon Valley is Earth, and there are these much bigger forces and bodies, which include energy, the chemical industry, these giant supply chains, and the semiconductor industry, which has been around for a very long time. It was pretty advanced, and people in Silicon Valley forgot about it." "I don't like the language of other industries pivoting into AI. I actually think it's the opposite." "I think it's like Silicon Valley is waking up from its toddlerhood and realizing that there were these giant industries that we underestimated, and they're actually really freaking good at what they do. And we can all benefit by working together."

Sequoia’s Shaun Maguire says Silicon Valley is undergoing a "Copernican" shift and waking up to the fact that it revolves around a set of much larger industries, not the other way around: "In Silicon Valley, [there's] almost this Copernican principle — where people used to believe that the world revolved around the Earth, then realized that it revolves around the sun." "There's a Silicon Valley parallel where people think that all of technology, all of industry, revolves around Silicon Valley, but it's actually kind of the opposite." "Silicon Valley is Earth, and there are these much bigger forces and bodies, which include energy, the chemical industry, these giant supply chains, and the semiconductor industry, which has been around for a very long time. It was pretty advanced, and people in Silicon Valley forgot about it." "I don't like the language of other industries pivoting into AI. I actually think it's the opposite." "I think it's like Silicon Valley is waking up from its toddlerhood and realizing that there were these giant industries that we underestimated, and they're actually really freaking good at what they do. And we can all benefit by working together."

TBPN

238,386 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Gavin on why people misunderstand what makes TSMC so valuable: "One of the most undervalued pieces of the supply chain story is that almost none of these things are buy it once and never talk to the vendor again. You have to go collaborate. That is the most important part of being successful in chips. People look at the tech, and the tech is the best in the world. But the real value is all in the service. TSMC's customer service is way better than I've seen at any company in any industry. If you say, we think you can improve your yield by making this change, they will go run an experiment on their own dime to see if they can get the higher yield. When we found we were right and it worked, they moved it over to the rest of the line. If I go to a steelworks plant and say I want you to change the composition of the steel, they'll say screw you. Not TSMC. It's why they're number one, and why they're going to win."

Gavin on why people misunderstand what makes TSMC so valuable: "One of the most undervalued pieces of the supply chain story is that almost none of these things are buy it once and never talk to the vendor again. You have to go collaborate. That is the most important part of being successful in chips. People look at the tech, and the tech is the best in the world. But the real value is all in the service. TSMC's customer service is way better than I've seen at any company in any industry. If you say, we think you can improve your yield by making this change, they will go run an experiment on their own dime to see if they can get the higher yield. When we found we were right and it worked, they moved it over to the rest of the line. If I go to a steelworks plant and say I want you to change the composition of the steel, they'll say screw you. Not TSMC. It's why they're number one, and why they're going to win."

Invest Like the Best

71,350 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Edward Norton: "You're not on the spectrum, shut up" and the Silicon Valley trend that aggravates him Host: "It occurred to me, do you think you're neurodivergent at all" "Not in a claimable you know, nameable way... this is a pet peeve" "I may not be right about this but I feel like Silicon Valley has done a lot of cool things and a lot of really negative things to our society" "One of the ones that I find kind of aggravating what is I would call the romanticization of like the idea of being on the spectrum" "You get all these people who are just basically assholes wanting to credit that to them being on the spectrum it's like you're not on the spectrum, shut up" "Like you know stop it and don't do that, don't casually" Host: "Write off all your bad behaviour" "Yeah and also don't casually try to claim as a superpower a thing that for a lot of people is a real thing"

Edward Norton: "You're not on the spectrum, shut up" and the Silicon Valley trend that aggravates him Host: "It occurred to me, do you think you're neurodivergent at all" "Not in a claimable you know, nameable way... this is a pet peeve" "I may not be right about this but I feel like Silicon Valley has done a lot of cool things and a lot of really negative things to our society" "One of the ones that I find kind of aggravating what is I would call the romanticization of like the idea of being on the spectrum" "You get all these people who are just basically assholes wanting to credit that to them being on the spectrum it's like you're not on the spectrum, shut up" "Like you know stop it and don't do that, don't casually" Host: "Write off all your bad behaviour" "Yeah and also don't casually try to claim as a superpower a thing that for a lot of people is a real thing"

le.hl

1,378,058 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Steve Jobs on how he learned to run a company: Question: "You're 21. You're a big success. You know, you've just sort of done it by the seat of your pants. You don't have any particular training in this. How do you learn to run a company?" Steve Jobs: "You know, throughout the years in business, I found something, which was that I always ask why you do things. And the answers you invariably get are, oh, that's just the way it's done. Nobody knows why they do what they do. Nobody thinks about things very deeply in business. That's what I found. I'll give you an example. When we were building our Apple I's in the garage, we knew exactly what they cost. When we got into a factory in the Apple II days, the accounting had this notion of a standard cost, where you'd kind of set a standard cost and at the end of a quarter you'd adjust it with a variance. And I kept asking, well, why do we do this? And the answer was, well, that's just the way it's done. And after about six months of digging into this, what I realized was the reason you do it is because you don't really have good enough controls to know how much it costs. So you guess, and then you fix your guess at the end of the quarter. And the reason you don't know how much it costs is because your information systems aren't good enough. But nobody said it that way. And so later on, when we designed this automated factory for Macintosh, we were able to get rid of a lot of these antiquated concepts and know exactly what something cost to the second. So in business, a lot of things are, I call it folklore. They're done because they were done yesterday and the day before. And so what that means is if you're willing to sort of ask a lot of questions and think about things and work really hard, you can learn business pretty fast. It's not the hardest thing in the world. It's not rocket science. It's not rocket science."

Steve Jobs on how he learned to run a company: Question: "You're 21. You're a big success. You know, you've just sort of done it by the seat of your pants. You don't have any particular training in this. How do you learn to run a company?" Steve Jobs: "You know, throughout the years in business, I found something, which was that I always ask why you do things. And the answers you invariably get are, oh, that's just the way it's done. Nobody knows why they do what they do. Nobody thinks about things very deeply in business. That's what I found. I'll give you an example. When we were building our Apple I's in the garage, we knew exactly what they cost. When we got into a factory in the Apple II days, the accounting had this notion of a standard cost, where you'd kind of set a standard cost and at the end of a quarter you'd adjust it with a variance. And I kept asking, well, why do we do this? And the answer was, well, that's just the way it's done. And after about six months of digging into this, what I realized was the reason you do it is because you don't really have good enough controls to know how much it costs. So you guess, and then you fix your guess at the end of the quarter. And the reason you don't know how much it costs is because your information systems aren't good enough. But nobody said it that way. And so later on, when we designed this automated factory for Macintosh, we were able to get rid of a lot of these antiquated concepts and know exactly what something cost to the second. So in business, a lot of things are, I call it folklore. They're done because they were done yesterday and the day before. And so what that means is if you're willing to sort of ask a lot of questions and think about things and work really hard, you can learn business pretty fast. It's not the hardest thing in the world. It's not rocket science. It's not rocket science."

Founder Mode

32,290 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

"The single biggest mistake people make in this area is: because they're intelligent in one area, they assume they're intelligent in all areas." Alex Karp on why Silicon Valley's culture of presenting as the smartest in the room is a weakness: "You have to be honest, aware about where your aptitude is." "A big failure mechanism in the valley is every valley person is forced to present as if they're the smartest in all areas at all times." "If you don't know who the mark is, you're the mark." "I'm dyslexic and I think one of the reasons I've done so well is ... I do think I'm one of the better people at certain things ... and I know I'm not at everything." "A failure mode for the valley is 'I'm the smartest on every issue ... I need to be the person negotiating this contract.' What if you have no aptitude for that?" "Just because you can do X does not mean you've imputed high aptitude at Y ... it's almost certain that you're just not smart enough to realize how bad you are." Palantir Katherine Boyle

"The single biggest mistake people make in this area is: because they're intelligent in one area, they assume they're intelligent in all areas." Alex Karp on why Silicon Valley's culture of presenting as the smartest in the room is a weakness: "You have to be honest, aware about where your aptitude is." "A big failure mechanism in the valley is every valley person is forced to present as if they're the smartest in all areas at all times." "If you don't know who the mark is, you're the mark." "I'm dyslexic and I think one of the reasons I've done so well is ... I do think I'm one of the better people at certain things ... and I know I'm not at everything." "A failure mode for the valley is 'I'm the smartest on every issue ... I need to be the person negotiating this contract.' What if you have no aptitude for that?" "Just because you can do X does not mean you've imputed high aptitude at Y ... it's almost certain that you're just not smart enough to realize how bad you are." Palantir Katherine Boyle

a16z

394,950 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

"Those monopoles... the 5G on buildings... that's the telecom staking their environment... [it's the] claim [that] they own you, they're going to surveil you...[and the FCC's] opened...the exact bandwidth that is actually weaponized... [and was] used in a theater of war in Iraq" This clip of Reinette Senum (Reinette Senum), a former mayor of Nevada City, California, is taken from an episode of the Children's Health Defense (Children’s Health Defense) series Financial Rebellion posted to Rumble on November 20, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "So what we're seeing is, and I'm trying to give some visuals to people, is that this is a chain to, that's going to ensure enslavement. And really they've just got one last link, that's it left, which is scary, but it's also the Achilles heel. And that's where we can really just draw the line and drop the gauntlet. And that link are, are these cell towers, the actual antennas being just popped up everywhere? Because they've got that framework, the infrastructure is there, those are those lines or they're underground. They just need to be able to put the antennas up without any interference whatsoever. "What people also don't realize there's a lot of really nefarious little things in the small print. But when a county or a city actually gives a contract to the telecoms and passes it, what people don't realize is those contracts are generally for 25 years and more than likely it'll be even longer than that because it's just, usually it's consent item. They just, you know, with one, you know, you know, one fell swoop, they just approve everything on the consent items. There's no discussion, no public discussion, no anything, no environment views. And then they add a different type of antenna. "So when those poles, those, those monopoles or the 5G on buildings, whatever, that's the telecom staking their environment. Their, their real estate claim. This is essentially vertical real estate. And the reason why they want to claim it and oversaturate it is because when they stake that claim, they own you, they're going to surveil you, they're going to spy on you, they're going to control you. They're going to take all that data where you're shopping, where you're spending, who you, where you're driving, what you're doing, all of your whereabouts, all of that data, they're going to collect it. "What we do know too, and you have to ask, why would the FCC do this? Was just a few years ago the FCC opened up a bandwidth, okay, so you have this spectrum and they only allow so much of this bandwidth to be sold and auctioned off to the telecoms. And what they did was a few years ago is they opened it up to the millimeter wave, to the exact bandwidth that is actually weaponized, is militarized, is used in a theater of war in Iraq. "We have a couple examples of what it can do. In 1991, military was celebrating. This is so phenomenal. We use the Millimeter wave. And what we did is we actually supplanted the, the voice of Allah into the soldiers and the farmers and the ranchers down below on the ground in Iraq. And we told them to give up their arms, put up their hands and you know, turn themselves in. It was a great it was a great win. It's like, wait, you did what to them? "Then I had another roommate of mine who's a former Air Force flight surgeon saying, oh yeah, we used to fly, you know, above Middle East and we would shoot down a beam of 5G and we would scramble the brains of anyone down on the ground. And then the foot soldiers would come along after that and shoot and kill anybody who was moving or looked alive whatsoever. And I had asked her, I said, well, this is horrific. Exactly what would that experience be to somebody on the ground? Well, they just hear a lot of static and they would then just drop dead because we just scrambled their brains. This, this is, these are the frequencies that the FCC put on the market. "Now the telecoms have this available to them. Why? Why would they ever allow this? Okay, so there's that piece. So they stake their claim, they're there for at least 25 years, but actually it's going to be longer. They have complete control and they are monitoring everything. And if they want to, they can do a slow cook or they can target. And that's the difference with the millimeter wave is... the millimeter wave actually targets the phone, it targets the person. Whereas 3G, 4G is just ubiquitous. As you send out the signal, you pick it up or you don't. There's that piece. "The other hidden piece that people do not realize is that in most of all these telecom contracts with the counties and the cities, basically they say, okay look it, you can use whatever kind of technology you want. You can go for 3G, 5G, 10G, 20G, we don't care as long as the antennas look like the original antennas when the, the whatever was installed. So that could be any kind of technology. So it could be a weaponized technology which is now what we are seeing already. And there's nothing you can do about it. "And while... they may have it on the agenda to vote on, generally there's no notification. People have no idea. Again, it's under consent items, which means there's probably 10, 20 other agenda items. They just vote all one fell, you know, swoop, just like what we kind of saw with Congress the other day. And, and it's done. There's a switch, and you have no idea. So this is also a Trojan horse. "And I try to say to people, when I look at cell towers, I see it as a towering Trojan horse for the military industrial complex, the surveillance state, the whole digital dystopian, you know, prison that we're talking about. This is the only way they can do it. The only way they can do it is by having these antennas everywhere. And while they do have satellite, there's more wiggle room there. But this is how they're going to do it. What's happened now is the FCC and congressional members, are paving the path where nobody can stop it."

"Those monopoles... the 5G on buildings... that's the telecom staking their environment... [it's the] claim [that] they own you, they're going to surveil you...[and the FCC's] opened...the exact bandwidth that is actually weaponized... [and was] used in a theater of war in Iraq" This clip of Reinette Senum (Reinette Senum), a former mayor of Nevada City, California, is taken from an episode of the Children's Health Defense (Children’s Health Defense) series Financial Rebellion posted to Rumble on November 20, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "So what we're seeing is, and I'm trying to give some visuals to people, is that this is a chain to, that's going to ensure enslavement. And really they've just got one last link, that's it left, which is scary, but it's also the Achilles heel. And that's where we can really just draw the line and drop the gauntlet. And that link are, are these cell towers, the actual antennas being just popped up everywhere? Because they've got that framework, the infrastructure is there, those are those lines or they're underground. They just need to be able to put the antennas up without any interference whatsoever. "What people also don't realize there's a lot of really nefarious little things in the small print. But when a county or a city actually gives a contract to the telecoms and passes it, what people don't realize is those contracts are generally for 25 years and more than likely it'll be even longer than that because it's just, usually it's consent item. They just, you know, with one, you know, you know, one fell swoop, they just approve everything on the consent items. There's no discussion, no public discussion, no anything, no environment views. And then they add a different type of antenna. "So when those poles, those, those monopoles or the 5G on buildings, whatever, that's the telecom staking their environment. Their, their real estate claim. This is essentially vertical real estate. And the reason why they want to claim it and oversaturate it is because when they stake that claim, they own you, they're going to surveil you, they're going to spy on you, they're going to control you. They're going to take all that data where you're shopping, where you're spending, who you, where you're driving, what you're doing, all of your whereabouts, all of that data, they're going to collect it. "What we do know too, and you have to ask, why would the FCC do this? Was just a few years ago the FCC opened up a bandwidth, okay, so you have this spectrum and they only allow so much of this bandwidth to be sold and auctioned off to the telecoms. And what they did was a few years ago is they opened it up to the millimeter wave, to the exact bandwidth that is actually weaponized, is militarized, is used in a theater of war in Iraq. "We have a couple examples of what it can do. In 1991, military was celebrating. This is so phenomenal. We use the Millimeter wave. And what we did is we actually supplanted the, the voice of Allah into the soldiers and the farmers and the ranchers down below on the ground in Iraq. And we told them to give up their arms, put up their hands and you know, turn themselves in. It was a great it was a great win. It's like, wait, you did what to them? "Then I had another roommate of mine who's a former Air Force flight surgeon saying, oh yeah, we used to fly, you know, above Middle East and we would shoot down a beam of 5G and we would scramble the brains of anyone down on the ground. And then the foot soldiers would come along after that and shoot and kill anybody who was moving or looked alive whatsoever. And I had asked her, I said, well, this is horrific. Exactly what would that experience be to somebody on the ground? Well, they just hear a lot of static and they would then just drop dead because we just scrambled their brains. This, this is, these are the frequencies that the FCC put on the market. "Now the telecoms have this available to them. Why? Why would they ever allow this? Okay, so there's that piece. So they stake their claim, they're there for at least 25 years, but actually it's going to be longer. They have complete control and they are monitoring everything. And if they want to, they can do a slow cook or they can target. And that's the difference with the millimeter wave is... the millimeter wave actually targets the phone, it targets the person. Whereas 3G, 4G is just ubiquitous. As you send out the signal, you pick it up or you don't. There's that piece. "The other hidden piece that people do not realize is that in most of all these telecom contracts with the counties and the cities, basically they say, okay look it, you can use whatever kind of technology you want. You can go for 3G, 5G, 10G, 20G, we don't care as long as the antennas look like the original antennas when the, the whatever was installed. So that could be any kind of technology. So it could be a weaponized technology which is now what we are seeing already. And there's nothing you can do about it. "And while... they may have it on the agenda to vote on, generally there's no notification. People have no idea. Again, it's under consent items, which means there's probably 10, 20 other agenda items. They just vote all one fell, you know, swoop, just like what we kind of saw with Congress the other day. And, and it's done. There's a switch, and you have no idea. So this is also a Trojan horse. "And I try to say to people, when I look at cell towers, I see it as a towering Trojan horse for the military industrial complex, the surveillance state, the whole digital dystopian, you know, prison that we're talking about. This is the only way they can do it. The only way they can do it is by having these antennas everywhere. And while they do have satellite, there's more wiggle room there. But this is how they're going to do it. What's happened now is the FCC and congressional members, are paving the path where nobody can stop it."

Sense Receptor

17,458 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

D'Angelo Russell says the Miami HEAT remind him of the Grit-and-Grind Memphis Grizzlies and Davion Mitchell is ready to take a huge step: “I think they're going to be that modern-day Memphis Grizzlies. When they had all those dudes in Memphis, you knew when you went there it was going to be a dogfight. I think you're going to see more of that with Miami. They're going to be able to score, but the way they're going to play—their style—is really going to beat you down, wear you out. Davion Mitchell... with the work he's putting in this summer, I think he's going to take a huge step under that organization.” (via The Backyard Podcast)

D'Angelo Russell says the Miami HEAT remind him of the Grit-and-Grind Memphis Grizzlies and Davion Mitchell is ready to take a huge step: “I think they're going to be that modern-day Memphis Grizzlies. When they had all those dudes in Memphis, you knew when you went there it was going to be a dogfight. I think you're going to see more of that with Miami. They're going to be able to score, but the way they're going to play—their style—is really going to beat you down, wear you out. Davion Mitchell... with the work he's putting in this summer, I think he's going to take a huge step under that organization.” (via The Backyard Podcast)

Heat Diehards

32,133 görüntüleme • 23 gün önce

.Rob Miles is spitting fire: “People are starting from a prior in which ‘[AIs] are safe until you give me an airtight case for why they're dangerous.’ This framing is exhausting. You explain one of the 10,000 ways that AIs could be dangerous, then they explain why they don't think that specific thing would happen. Then you have to change tack, and then they say, 'your story keeps changing'... "If you're building an AGI, it's like building a Saturn V rocket [but with every human on it]. It's a complex, difficult engineering task, and you're going to try and make it aligned, which means it's going to deliver people to the moon and home again. People ask “why assume they won't just land on the Moon and return home safely?" And I'm like, because you don't know what you're doing! If you try to send people to the moon and you don't know what you're doing, your astronauts will die. [Unlike the telephone, or electricity, where you can assume it’s probably going to work out okay] I contend that ASI is more like the moon rocket. "The moon is small compared with the rest of the sky, so you don't get to the moon by default - you hit some part of the sky that isn't the moon. So, show me the plan by which you predict to specifically hit the moon." And then people say, “how do you predict that [AIs] will want bad things?” There's more bad things than good things! It's not actually a complicated argument... I'm not going to predict specifically where it off into random space your astronauts are going, but you're not going to hit the moon unless you have a really good, technically clear plan for how you do it. And if you ask these people for their plan, they don't have one. What's Yann Lecun’s plan?” "I think that if you're building an enormously powerful technology and you have a lot of uncertainty about what's going to happen, this is bad. Like, this is default unsafe. If you've got something that's going to do enormously influential things in the world, and you don't know what enormously influential things it's going to do, this thing is unsafe until you can convince me that it's safe." HOST: “That’s a good way of thinking about it - with some technologies you can assume that the default will be good or at least neutral, or that the capacity of a person to use this in a very bad way is bounded somehow. There's just only so many people you could electrocute one by one."

.Rob Miles is spitting fire: “People are starting from a prior in which ‘[AIs] are safe until you give me an airtight case for why they're dangerous.’ This framing is exhausting. You explain one of the 10,000 ways that AIs could be dangerous, then they explain why they don't think that specific thing would happen. Then you have to change tack, and then they say, 'your story keeps changing'... "If you're building an AGI, it's like building a Saturn V rocket [but with every human on it]. It's a complex, difficult engineering task, and you're going to try and make it aligned, which means it's going to deliver people to the moon and home again. People ask “why assume they won't just land on the Moon and return home safely?" And I'm like, because you don't know what you're doing! If you try to send people to the moon and you don't know what you're doing, your astronauts will die. [Unlike the telephone, or electricity, where you can assume it’s probably going to work out okay] I contend that ASI is more like the moon rocket. "The moon is small compared with the rest of the sky, so you don't get to the moon by default - you hit some part of the sky that isn't the moon. So, show me the plan by which you predict to specifically hit the moon." And then people say, “how do you predict that [AIs] will want bad things?” There's more bad things than good things! It's not actually a complicated argument... I'm not going to predict specifically where it off into random space your astronauts are going, but you're not going to hit the moon unless you have a really good, technically clear plan for how you do it. And if you ask these people for their plan, they don't have one. What's Yann Lecun’s plan?” "I think that if you're building an enormously powerful technology and you have a lot of uncertainty about what's going to happen, this is bad. Like, this is default unsafe. If you've got something that's going to do enormously influential things in the world, and you don't know what enormously influential things it's going to do, this thing is unsafe until you can convince me that it's safe." HOST: “That’s a good way of thinking about it - with some technologies you can assume that the default will be good or at least neutral, or that the capacity of a person to use this in a very bad way is bounded somehow. There's just only so many people you could electrocute one by one."

AI Notkilleveryoneism Memes ⏸️

77,378 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce

JUST IN: Hunter Biden says based on his intel, the problem in America today, gay republicans in DC, they are gays and know everyone else who is also gay and help themselves as gays. "I believe that the biggest problem in America is in Washington, D.C. with the federal government is a, is it not the oligarchy? Um, it's the closetocracy as I call it, it is. And I'm, and I'm being totally serious. Everybody knows there is like this closeted gay mafia, largely Republican that exists in Washington, D.C. And everybody knows every single one of them. Who, who's gay. "And so it's, and, and what I believe the, the only reason that that is relevant is because I believe that internal conflict creates so much vitriol inside a person that they take it out on the rest of the world and they do. "And so what they do is their whole lives, they've been closeted until you have this like black ball inside your, your, yourself, this like black, blackened heart by the fact that you can't be who you want to be until you take it out on everybody else. And these men, largely men have done exactly that. And they're, everybody knows who they are. Everybody. Yeah."

JUST IN: Hunter Biden says based on his intel, the problem in America today, gay republicans in DC, they are gays and know everyone else who is also gay and help themselves as gays. "I believe that the biggest problem in America is in Washington, D.C. with the federal government is a, is it not the oligarchy? Um, it's the closetocracy as I call it, it is. And I'm, and I'm being totally serious. Everybody knows there is like this closeted gay mafia, largely Republican that exists in Washington, D.C. And everybody knows every single one of them. Who, who's gay. "And so it's, and, and what I believe the, the only reason that that is relevant is because I believe that internal conflict creates so much vitriol inside a person that they take it out on the rest of the world and they do. "And so what they do is their whole lives, they've been closeted until you have this like black ball inside your, your, yourself, this like black, blackened heart by the fact that you can't be who you want to be until you take it out on everybody else. And these men, largely men have done exactly that. And they're, everybody knows who they are. Everybody. Yeah."

Simon Ateba

47,772 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Curtis Yarvin on how "the Left" has executed population replacement in the White Dominions as a "stalk and charge." "This is a predator... [and] they're starting to speed run...mass immigration is not 2 million people entering the US a year...[it's] 10... to 100 million a year" This clip of Yarvin (Curtis Yarvin), a political blogger and software developer (according to Wikipedia), is taken from a conversation with Peter McCormack (Peter McCormack 🏴‍☠️🇬🇧🇮🇪) posted to McCormack's eponymous YouTube channel on February 23, 2026. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "You might think that people getting red-pilled in various ways is something that would really put a stop to this craziness of population replacement. Oh, no, actually it's quite very much the reverse. "Because there's something anyone who's totally lost faith in the Left, in a way, they have many complaints with the Left. But it all boils down to, you basically recognize that this is not a vegetarian thing. This is a predator, right? "And so this is a predator. And so when a predator such as a lion is hunting, there are basically two phases of the pursuit. There's the stalk and the charge. And the stalk is like, well, nobody really knows what's going on here. Like, let's take the demographic replacement in the U.S. It's from the, you know, the 1965 Immigration Act. And politicians swore up and down that this was not what it, what it was. Basically, since that act, basically it's brought like 100 million people from the third world into the US, right? "Something like that. Solid, solid numbers like that. And, but in order to sort of do that, you know, you couldn't have this giant boat lift where, you know, some gigantic version of the Empire Windrush brought 100 million people at the same time. It's more a case of like, you know, slowly, slowly, catchy, catchy fish, right? You know, where you're kind of tickling it and you're like, oh yeah, oh yeah, our friends from, you know, we're open, our hearts are welcoming, right? "You know, like all of this, like, you know, stuff that's just of course, unbelievably sinister because it's sort of trading on people's goodwill and people's good wishes. It's like this con. But the thing is, when people, when enough people see the con, and all of these systems are incentive-based, they're not based on planning, the Left is not run by some cabal. It's incentives that drive things. "What you're seeing, especially in what used to be called the white dominions, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, especially is you're seeing they're starting to speed run, they're starting to come out of their crouch and basically just be like, yeah, actually we're, I mean in the 21st century, I think they've increased the population of Canada by like 35%. Right? "And so even that is small. Even that is small. The Spanish government was just like, we're going to legalize 500,000. Oh, but that's just an estimate. That's just an estimate of how many people that plan will suck in it probably will be more like over a million. Right. "And so you know and those people are Schengen. They can go anywhere in Europe and you will see them do that and the like and and so what you could see in the US if basically the next time Democrats win the presidency people go on about like mass immigration. Like no, we've not seen mass immigration. You have no idea what mass immigration is. "Mass Immigration is not 2 million people entering the US a year. Mass immigration starts I I would call it mass until it was like 10 a year. And like mass immigration is really the 10 to 50 to 100 million a year. But that's what could spark civil war. No, no— I don't know I'm seeing it here. No because people have no balls. People have no balls—"

Curtis Yarvin on how "the Left" has executed population replacement in the White Dominions as a "stalk and charge." "This is a predator... [and] they're starting to speed run...mass immigration is not 2 million people entering the US a year...[it's] 10... to 100 million a year" This clip of Yarvin (Curtis Yarvin), a political blogger and software developer (according to Wikipedia), is taken from a conversation with Peter McCormack (Peter McCormack 🏴‍☠️🇬🇧🇮🇪) posted to McCormack's eponymous YouTube channel on February 23, 2026. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "You might think that people getting red-pilled in various ways is something that would really put a stop to this craziness of population replacement. Oh, no, actually it's quite very much the reverse. "Because there's something anyone who's totally lost faith in the Left, in a way, they have many complaints with the Left. But it all boils down to, you basically recognize that this is not a vegetarian thing. This is a predator, right? "And so this is a predator. And so when a predator such as a lion is hunting, there are basically two phases of the pursuit. There's the stalk and the charge. And the stalk is like, well, nobody really knows what's going on here. Like, let's take the demographic replacement in the U.S. It's from the, you know, the 1965 Immigration Act. And politicians swore up and down that this was not what it, what it was. Basically, since that act, basically it's brought like 100 million people from the third world into the US, right? "Something like that. Solid, solid numbers like that. And, but in order to sort of do that, you know, you couldn't have this giant boat lift where, you know, some gigantic version of the Empire Windrush brought 100 million people at the same time. It's more a case of like, you know, slowly, slowly, catchy, catchy fish, right? You know, where you're kind of tickling it and you're like, oh yeah, oh yeah, our friends from, you know, we're open, our hearts are welcoming, right? "You know, like all of this, like, you know, stuff that's just of course, unbelievably sinister because it's sort of trading on people's goodwill and people's good wishes. It's like this con. But the thing is, when people, when enough people see the con, and all of these systems are incentive-based, they're not based on planning, the Left is not run by some cabal. It's incentives that drive things. "What you're seeing, especially in what used to be called the white dominions, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, especially is you're seeing they're starting to speed run, they're starting to come out of their crouch and basically just be like, yeah, actually we're, I mean in the 21st century, I think they've increased the population of Canada by like 35%. Right? "And so even that is small. Even that is small. The Spanish government was just like, we're going to legalize 500,000. Oh, but that's just an estimate. That's just an estimate of how many people that plan will suck in it probably will be more like over a million. Right. "And so you know and those people are Schengen. They can go anywhere in Europe and you will see them do that and the like and and so what you could see in the US if basically the next time Democrats win the presidency people go on about like mass immigration. Like no, we've not seen mass immigration. You have no idea what mass immigration is. "Mass Immigration is not 2 million people entering the US a year. Mass immigration starts I I would call it mass until it was like 10 a year. And like mass immigration is really the 10 to 50 to 100 million a year. But that's what could spark civil war. No, no— I don't know I'm seeing it here. No because people have no balls. People have no balls—"

Sense Receptor

246,748 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

“I'm not a huge hater of the institutions. I wasn't a huge hater of altcoins. These institutional products are just kind of altcoins. People can go make their money. Go do your thing. But it's not Bitcoin. An ETF is not Bitcoin. With these centralized projects, you're not getting the core values of Bitcoin, the control, the censorship resistance, the privacy. You're putting it in a centralized wrapper, and if you put Bitcoin in a centralized wrapper, you lose everything that's good about it. It's not Bitcoin. It's just an affinity marketing thing. It's “Hey, you like Bitcoin, go buy my other project." Just like, "Hey you like bitcoin? Go buy my altcoin." It's not the same thing, and I think in many ways it's a step backwards. I don't hate these people, but they certainly shouldn't be celebrated. It's not forwarding our industry if we do treasury strategies, if we do ETFs, we cheer for BlackRock and Cantor. That's a step backwards. It's not something to be cheerful for. It's not a victory, in my opinion. A victory is having more people have direct ownership of real Bitcoin. We now have millions of people who've been onboarded into this fake paper thing that's a claim on a claim on a claim of something that has Bitcoin in the words, but it's not actually Bitcoin. They are never actually holding a wallet like many of us did back in 2012 where somebody sent us that first dollar and you say, "Wow, this is cool. I didn't need to give my ID and I'm able to control and hold this sound money for the first time." You now have a whole generation of millions of people that don't have that. They have some junk fiat product sitting like sludge on their centralized brokerage account at the centralized clearing firm, traded on a centralized exchange, with a centralized transfer agent, and a centralized custodian, and they have to trust six levels of people on a claim for something that has the word ‘Bitcoin’ in it. It's not a victory. It's not a step forward. I don't think it's something that should be celebrated at all.”

“I'm not a huge hater of the institutions. I wasn't a huge hater of altcoins. These institutional products are just kind of altcoins. People can go make their money. Go do your thing. But it's not Bitcoin. An ETF is not Bitcoin. With these centralized projects, you're not getting the core values of Bitcoin, the control, the censorship resistance, the privacy. You're putting it in a centralized wrapper, and if you put Bitcoin in a centralized wrapper, you lose everything that's good about it. It's not Bitcoin. It's just an affinity marketing thing. It's “Hey, you like Bitcoin, go buy my other project." Just like, "Hey you like bitcoin? Go buy my altcoin." It's not the same thing, and I think in many ways it's a step backwards. I don't hate these people, but they certainly shouldn't be celebrated. It's not forwarding our industry if we do treasury strategies, if we do ETFs, we cheer for BlackRock and Cantor. That's a step backwards. It's not something to be cheerful for. It's not a victory, in my opinion. A victory is having more people have direct ownership of real Bitcoin. We now have millions of people who've been onboarded into this fake paper thing that's a claim on a claim on a claim of something that has Bitcoin in the words, but it's not actually Bitcoin. They are never actually holding a wallet like many of us did back in 2012 where somebody sent us that first dollar and you say, "Wow, this is cool. I didn't need to give my ID and I'm able to control and hold this sound money for the first time." You now have a whole generation of millions of people that don't have that. They have some junk fiat product sitting like sludge on their centralized brokerage account at the centralized clearing firm, traded on a centralized exchange, with a centralized transfer agent, and a centralized custodian, and they have to trust six levels of people on a claim for something that has the word ‘Bitcoin’ in it. It's not a victory. It's not a step forward. I don't think it's something that should be celebrated at all.”

Bruce Fenton

23,882 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Debating groyper. He says that defending Taiwan from China is Jewish, so I try to explain to him what TSMC is. DREW: Do you know what TSMC is? WILL: Oh, here we go ... look at these deflections. Of course it comes back to Blackrock and it comes back to Israel and they're stealing all our oil money. Why are you talking about Taiwan? We need Australian values. Who's an Australian, how do you define an Australian? DREW: Can I finish my point about TSMC? There's this critical choke point in the entire global economy where 90% of the silicon chips that power everything - the entire Australian economy - is made by this one chip manufacturer in Taiwan, TSMC. So if TSMC falls, then the entire Australian economy is literally fucked tomorrow. You don't even know what TSMC is. WILL: I do know that Palantir just signed over $700 million worth of contracts on a federal level. DREW: Palantir is completely irrelevant to this discussion. WILL: But you want to talk about silicon so let's actually talk about Silicon Valley and where our technology is going to be coming from - these big figures are all parts of Zionist operations.

Debating groyper. He says that defending Taiwan from China is Jewish, so I try to explain to him what TSMC is. DREW: Do you know what TSMC is? WILL: Oh, here we go ... look at these deflections. Of course it comes back to Blackrock and it comes back to Israel and they're stealing all our oil money. Why are you talking about Taiwan? We need Australian values. Who's an Australian, how do you define an Australian? DREW: Can I finish my point about TSMC? There's this critical choke point in the entire global economy where 90% of the silicon chips that power everything - the entire Australian economy - is made by this one chip manufacturer in Taiwan, TSMC. So if TSMC falls, then the entire Australian economy is literally fucked tomorrow. You don't even know what TSMC is. WILL: I do know that Palantir just signed over $700 million worth of contracts on a federal level. DREW: Palantir is completely irrelevant to this discussion. WILL: But you want to talk about silicon so let's actually talk about Silicon Valley and where our technology is going to be coming from - these big figures are all parts of Zionist operations.

Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼

256,404 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

David Sacks: Silicon Valley Was Built On Permissionless Innovation “ The thing that really makes Silicon Valley special is this concept of permissionless innovation.” “Since Hewlett and Packard 85 years ago started building Silicon Valley, the idea has always been that just a couple of founders can have a great idea, start their company, they get some angel investors to write a check for seed capital.” “Those investors think they're probably going to lose their money, but they figure there's a shot.” “It could be the two guys in their garage, or it could be the college dropout in the dorm room, and they don't need to go to Washington to get permission for their idea, right? It's permissionless innovation.” “That's what has made Silicon Valley the crown jewel of the world.” “It's why so many of the heads of state who are here are always asking, ‘How do we create our own Silicon Valley?’” “That was not the direction we were on when President Trump came into office.” “The new 300 pages of regulations concerning AI the Biden administration left us with would've changed this environment of permissionless innovation to an environment of you have to go to Washington to get approval for your idea.” “And I think that President Trump really corrected that.” “And since then, we've been implementing his AI action plan, which is all about pro-innovation, pro infrastructure, pro-energy, and pro-export.” “So it's been a total change. And I think just in the past year you've seen the results of that.”

David Sacks: Silicon Valley Was Built On Permissionless Innovation “ The thing that really makes Silicon Valley special is this concept of permissionless innovation.” “Since Hewlett and Packard 85 years ago started building Silicon Valley, the idea has always been that just a couple of founders can have a great idea, start their company, they get some angel investors to write a check for seed capital.” “Those investors think they're probably going to lose their money, but they figure there's a shot.” “It could be the two guys in their garage, or it could be the college dropout in the dorm room, and they don't need to go to Washington to get permission for their idea, right? It's permissionless innovation.” “That's what has made Silicon Valley the crown jewel of the world.” “It's why so many of the heads of state who are here are always asking, ‘How do we create our own Silicon Valley?’” “That was not the direction we were on when President Trump came into office.” “The new 300 pages of regulations concerning AI the Biden administration left us with would've changed this environment of permissionless innovation to an environment of you have to go to Washington to get approval for your idea.” “And I think that President Trump really corrected that.” “And since then, we've been implementing his AI action plan, which is all about pro-innovation, pro infrastructure, pro-energy, and pro-export.” “So it's been a total change. And I think just in the past year you've seen the results of that.”

The All-In Podcast

85,817 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Zack Snyder discusses virtual production technology with the Russo Bros. and explains why he chose to build practical sets for Rebel Moon: "The idea of this sort of virtual production that's really interesting is that it does come back around. The green screen environment is an exclusive world, right? "Like there's not a lot of guys that can make a movie with no sets. Because as it is now, there's a thousand visual effects artists between that green screen and it being in your movie. "In the virtual production version, anybody who walks in there with a camera... The desert is there. And they can go and film it. So in a lot of ways it's kind of... it demystifies visual effects a little bit. "The thing that I've always found a little off-putting about a big green screen environment is it's not really engaging for anybody. Even for us, even for the filmmakers. We've been looking at the concept, we know what it is. "And the actors especially are like, 'I don't know where the hell I am.' Like, 'I guess... Okay, whatever you guys say, I'll do it.'" Anthony Russo: "But for camera operators too, right? It's just like there's nothing to grab on to." Snyder: "Yeah, I don't know, tilt up to the mountain. What mountain?" Joe Russo: "No, no, it's a little higher." Snyder: "Yeah, exactly. I think it's a small mountain. "Anyway, but I do think that the introduction of this kind of virtual productions as a concept really brings sort of physicality back to visual effects. And sort of a fantastic world. "You really can, you know, you can feel it and see it. They can put Atmos in, it can really feel like you're in a place. Which is really just... You're more passionate about it, you know, filming it. "Like I did a small thing that we were just really more of an experiment. And I was really fascinated by like, you know, they're like, 'Okay, here's, we have a cave set with light shafts coming through these holes in the ceiling.' And then we were like, literally, you know, 'Okay, now we're in like this forest.' "And it was the same rocks, but suddenly they didn't look like- they worked in both spots. It was just, I was like, 'Wow, this is really...' And even the focus and everything, the wall understood the depth of field as well. "So like everything, like especially in the eyepiece was like, 'Wow, that's scary.' That's like, feels like I'm there. So I think there's huge potential and hugely exciting future for that technology. "You know, as it becomes more available to like, and also scale, I think, you know, from this to like also being able to have, you know, 100 guys standing around inside of, you know, a giant environment would be just, it's just cool. Which they're doing now anyway, everyone's doing it. "But what was funny, because like on the movie that we're working on now, we ended up, we took a deep dive into it. And it just, the reason why we ended up not doing it in the end was because we just, we have these big war scenes. "And I had like 100 guys, you know, and we were just like, I don't even like, the amount of French reverses I have to do, everyone's brains were exploding. "Because, you know, you're always like, I'm like, 'Oh, just flip the set again and flip the set again.' And then for his reverse, we flipped the set that way and we flipped the set that way. "And so we had to build all the, all in the design, everything was symmetrical, right? Like the bridges and the houses were kind of symmetrical. "So you could always be flipping and not tell... because the sets were all symmetrical. You could shoot them from both sides and it was kind of the same. But the audience couldn't tell because the backgrounds were not symmetrical. "So it was only the immediate stuff, you know. It was, so it was a bit of a brain teaser for everyone. And then in the end, we were like, because of the scale of the fighting, I was like, 'Oh, let's just...' "So now we're just building it up the road. "But it's cool. "It's fun to build a giant thing as well. Just to go there and like, 'Oh my God, we made a village.'

Zack Snyder discusses virtual production technology with the Russo Bros. and explains why he chose to build practical sets for Rebel Moon: "The idea of this sort of virtual production that's really interesting is that it does come back around. The green screen environment is an exclusive world, right? "Like there's not a lot of guys that can make a movie with no sets. Because as it is now, there's a thousand visual effects artists between that green screen and it being in your movie. "In the virtual production version, anybody who walks in there with a camera... The desert is there. And they can go and film it. So in a lot of ways it's kind of... it demystifies visual effects a little bit. "The thing that I've always found a little off-putting about a big green screen environment is it's not really engaging for anybody. Even for us, even for the filmmakers. We've been looking at the concept, we know what it is. "And the actors especially are like, 'I don't know where the hell I am.' Like, 'I guess... Okay, whatever you guys say, I'll do it.'" Anthony Russo: "But for camera operators too, right? It's just like there's nothing to grab on to." Snyder: "Yeah, I don't know, tilt up to the mountain. What mountain?" Joe Russo: "No, no, it's a little higher." Snyder: "Yeah, exactly. I think it's a small mountain. "Anyway, but I do think that the introduction of this kind of virtual productions as a concept really brings sort of physicality back to visual effects. And sort of a fantastic world. "You really can, you know, you can feel it and see it. They can put Atmos in, it can really feel like you're in a place. Which is really just... You're more passionate about it, you know, filming it. "Like I did a small thing that we were just really more of an experiment. And I was really fascinated by like, you know, they're like, 'Okay, here's, we have a cave set with light shafts coming through these holes in the ceiling.' And then we were like, literally, you know, 'Okay, now we're in like this forest.' "And it was the same rocks, but suddenly they didn't look like- they worked in both spots. It was just, I was like, 'Wow, this is really...' And even the focus and everything, the wall understood the depth of field as well. "So like everything, like especially in the eyepiece was like, 'Wow, that's scary.' That's like, feels like I'm there. So I think there's huge potential and hugely exciting future for that technology. "You know, as it becomes more available to like, and also scale, I think, you know, from this to like also being able to have, you know, 100 guys standing around inside of, you know, a giant environment would be just, it's just cool. Which they're doing now anyway, everyone's doing it. "But what was funny, because like on the movie that we're working on now, we ended up, we took a deep dive into it. And it just, the reason why we ended up not doing it in the end was because we just, we have these big war scenes. "And I had like 100 guys, you know, and we were just like, I don't even like, the amount of French reverses I have to do, everyone's brains were exploding. "Because, you know, you're always like, I'm like, 'Oh, just flip the set again and flip the set again.' And then for his reverse, we flipped the set that way and we flipped the set that way. "And so we had to build all the, all in the design, everything was symmetrical, right? Like the bridges and the houses were kind of symmetrical. "So you could always be flipping and not tell... because the sets were all symmetrical. You could shoot them from both sides and it was kind of the same. But the audience couldn't tell because the backgrounds were not symmetrical. "So it was only the immediate stuff, you know. It was, so it was a bit of a brain teaser for everyone. And then in the end, we were like, because of the scale of the fighting, I was like, 'Oh, let's just...' "So now we're just building it up the road. "But it's cool. "It's fun to build a giant thing as well. Just to go there and like, 'Oh my God, we made a village.'

Zack Snyder Film

23,149 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

The difference a lot of people don't realize is that when you're a celebrity, 50% of the population doesn't like you. That's just how it is. They don't like you. But when you're a politician, 50% of the constituency hates you and two and a half percent of them want to kill you. That's the difference. There's always that two and a half percent lunatic fringe no matter where you are. It's pretty scary and it's tough on your family and that's why I have so much respect for politicians.

The difference a lot of people don't realize is that when you're a celebrity, 50% of the population doesn't like you. That's just how it is. They don't like you. But when you're a politician, 50% of the constituency hates you and two and a half percent of them want to kill you. That's the difference. There's always that two and a half percent lunatic fringe no matter where you are. It's pretty scary and it's tough on your family and that's why I have so much respect for politicians.

Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful

24,897 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce