Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

When in an hotel things can get very steamy between Dad Simon Socks 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 🔞 and Son Feet Well Dressed 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🔞 | SocksByBrad #goldtoe #dresssocks #socksfetish #sockslover #socksaddict #socksgame #falke #sockselfie #sheersocksfetish #socksforsale #dadson

dadsonsocks's profile picture

Dad Son Socks 🇬🇧🇺🇸🔞

40,811 subscribers

300,153 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren •via X (Twitter)

NSFW#goldtoe#dresssocks#socksfetish#sockslover#socksaddict#socksgame#falke#sockselfie#sheersocksfetish#socksforsale#dadson
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Peter Thiel on why shortcuts worked perfectly for Boomers but are “deadly” if you’re a Millennial Thiel believes the effectiveness of “shortcuts” in life oscillates from generation to generation: “It’s a good idea to take shortcuts in a world where nobody takes shortcuts. In a world where everybody takes shortcuts, maybe the shortcut isn’t going to work and you’re actually better off figuring out the other thing.” He gives politics as an example: “The shortcut in politics is, ‘I’m not going to figure out what I think about the issues; I’m just going to look at the polls.’ The pollster was the one who was really for President, and that was an effective Boomer technique for many years. If you had a better pollster, you could more quickly get to where the crowd was going, and you didn’t need to waste time thinking about stuff. In a world where very few people are doing it, that can be a very good strategy. But by the time you get to the Millennials — when everyone’s been trained to take shortcuts — it doesn’t quite work.” Thiel continues: “It vaguely maps onto tracking. Tracking in school or tracking professionally is a shortcut to a successful career. Baby Boomers who stayed on track did quite well… you went to law school, you became a partner at a law firm, and the tracks worked. By the time we get to the Millennials, they know all the tracks you’re supposed to do, but the tracks work less well when everyone knows them and everyone’s doing the same thing. There are these similarities between the Millennials and the Boomers, but in practice it’s working really differently. The things that would’ve worked perfectly for you as a Boomer are deadly if you’re a Millennial.” Video source: Dave Rubin Dave RubinShow (2018)
1:58

Peter Thiel on why shortcuts worked perfectly for Boomers but are “deadly” if you’re a Millennial Thiel believes the effectiveness of “shortcuts” in life oscillates from generation to generation: “It’s a good idea to take shortcuts in a world where nobody takes shortcuts. In a world where everybody takes shortcuts, maybe the shortcut isn’t going to work and you’re actually better off figuring out the other thing.” He gives politics as an example: “The shortcut in politics is, ‘I’m not going to figure out what I think about the issues; I’m just going to look at the polls.’ The pollster was the one who was really for President, and that was an effective Boomer technique for many years. If you had a better pollster, you could more quickly get to where the crowd was going, and you didn’t need to waste time thinking about stuff. In a world where very few people are doing it, that can be a very good strategy. But by the time you get to the Millennials — when everyone’s been trained to take shortcuts — it doesn’t quite work.” Thiel continues: “It vaguely maps onto tracking. Tracking in school or tracking professionally is a shortcut to a successful career. Baby Boomers who stayed on track did quite well… you went to law school, you became a partner at a law firm, and the tracks worked. By the time we get to the Millennials, they know all the tracks you’re supposed to do, but the tracks work less well when everyone knows them and everyone’s doing the same thing. There are these similarities between the Millennials and the Boomers, but in practice it’s working really differently. The things that would’ve worked perfectly for you as a Boomer are deadly if you’re a Millennial.” Video source: Dave Rubin Dave RubinShow (2018)

Startup Archive

146,459 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

Warren Buffett: "If we can't make a decision in five minutes, we can't make it in five months." In a Q&A, a shareholder from Munich, Germany asks Buffett a specific question: how large is the universe of companies whose intrinsic value he carries in his head — the ones he could act on within a day or two if the market offered an attractive price? Buffett doesn't give a number. He reframes the question entirely. Speed, he explains, doesn't come from knowing more. It comes from refusing to think about most things at all. "Our immediate decision is whether we can figure out what's being offered to us or not. I mean, there's a go no-go signal." That signal fires almost immediately: "Charlie and I are often thought to be rude when we think we're just being polite and not wasting the other person's time. So, as they start mid-sentence in their first conversation with us, we just say, 'Forget it.'" He continues: "We know very, very, very early in the conversation whether somebody's talking about something that there's any chance is actionable by us, and we don't worry about the ones we miss." The filter isn't about the quality of the opportunity. It's about whether Buffett is equipped to judge it: "We want to make sure that we don't waste any time thinking about things that, when we got all through thinking about them, we're not going to know enough to make the decision on. So we just rule those out, and that rules a lot of things out." What survives that filter gets decided on immediately: "So we make decisions—we can make a decision in five minutes very easily. I mean, it just is not that complicated." Then comes the line that explains the whole system: "If we can't make a decision in five minutes, we can't make it in five months. You know, there's—we're not going to learn enough in the following five months to make up for the fact that we went in deficient in the first place." Deliberation doesn't fix a knowledge deficit. If you weren't already competent to judge the thing, five months of study won't close the gap — it will only manufacture the confidence to act badly. So when the input arrives — a phone call about a business for sale, or a price in a newspaper, a magazine, an annual report, a 10-K — the only thing Buffett is looking for is a "significant differential between price and value." If it's there, "we move right then." "And Charlie and I don't need to talk to each other about it; I mean, we both think the same way and we have generally similar spheres of knowledge." Charlie Munger then names the mechanism directly: "The answer to your question is we can make a lot of decisions about a lot of things very fast and very easily, and we're unusual in that respect. And the reason we're able to do that is there's such an enormous other lot of things that we won't allow ourselves to think about at all. It's just that simple." He gives his own example: "I have a little phrase when people make pitches to me, and about halfway through the first sentence I say, 'We don't do startups; they don't exist.' Well, if you blot out startups, there's a whole layer of complexity that goes out of your life." And he confirms this is a system, not a one-off: "And we've got other little 'blotter out' systems, and using those we finally find out that what remains is still a pretty large territory that we can handle." Buffett closes with the part most people get backwards: "We waste—I would say we waste a lot of time, but we waste it on things we want to waste our time on. And then we're very selective about that, and then we're good at it." The five-minute decision is not actually made in five minutes. Source: 2008 Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting
4:52

Warren Buffett: "If we can't make a decision in five minutes, we can't make it in five months." In a Q&A, a shareholder from Munich, Germany asks Buffett a specific question: how large is the universe of companies whose intrinsic value he carries in his head — the ones he could act on within a day or two if the market offered an attractive price? Buffett doesn't give a number. He reframes the question entirely. Speed, he explains, doesn't come from knowing more. It comes from refusing to think about most things at all. "Our immediate decision is whether we can figure out what's being offered to us or not. I mean, there's a go no-go signal." That signal fires almost immediately: "Charlie and I are often thought to be rude when we think we're just being polite and not wasting the other person's time. So, as they start mid-sentence in their first conversation with us, we just say, 'Forget it.'" He continues: "We know very, very, very early in the conversation whether somebody's talking about something that there's any chance is actionable by us, and we don't worry about the ones we miss." The filter isn't about the quality of the opportunity. It's about whether Buffett is equipped to judge it: "We want to make sure that we don't waste any time thinking about things that, when we got all through thinking about them, we're not going to know enough to make the decision on. So we just rule those out, and that rules a lot of things out." What survives that filter gets decided on immediately: "So we make decisions—we can make a decision in five minutes very easily. I mean, it just is not that complicated." Then comes the line that explains the whole system: "If we can't make a decision in five minutes, we can't make it in five months. You know, there's—we're not going to learn enough in the following five months to make up for the fact that we went in deficient in the first place." Deliberation doesn't fix a knowledge deficit. If you weren't already competent to judge the thing, five months of study won't close the gap — it will only manufacture the confidence to act badly. So when the input arrives — a phone call about a business for sale, or a price in a newspaper, a magazine, an annual report, a 10-K — the only thing Buffett is looking for is a "significant differential between price and value." If it's there, "we move right then." "And Charlie and I don't need to talk to each other about it; I mean, we both think the same way and we have generally similar spheres of knowledge." Charlie Munger then names the mechanism directly: "The answer to your question is we can make a lot of decisions about a lot of things very fast and very easily, and we're unusual in that respect. And the reason we're able to do that is there's such an enormous other lot of things that we won't allow ourselves to think about at all. It's just that simple." He gives his own example: "I have a little phrase when people make pitches to me, and about halfway through the first sentence I say, 'We don't do startups; they don't exist.' Well, if you blot out startups, there's a whole layer of complexity that goes out of your life." And he confirms this is a system, not a one-off: "And we've got other little 'blotter out' systems, and using those we finally find out that what remains is still a pretty large territory that we can handle." Buffett closes with the part most people get backwards: "We waste—I would say we waste a lot of time, but we waste it on things we want to waste our time on. And then we're very selective about that, and then we're good at it." The five-minute decision is not actually made in five minutes. Source: 2008 Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting

Finance Nerd

54,299 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

WATCH: Trump's full answer on the federal judge's ruling about the East Wing ballroom construction... .New York Post’s Steven Nelson: “A judge just ordered you to stop construction of the ballroom. Are you planning to stop?” President Trump: “Well, we’ll appeal, but it’s not — I don’t know — it’s basically — I mean, I wrote [sic] — I wrote [sic] wrote part of his opinion. But basically he’s saying I need congressional approval. And he's so wrong. This is being financed privately. It’s a donation that's being given by companies, very rich companies, very rich people, so that, for 150 years, they’ve wanted a ballroom here. We’re going to have the finest ballroom, I believe, anywhere in the world. And he said we need congressional approval. Well, they don’t give congressional approval from the White House when they do things — they don’t — especially when, you know, we didn't ask for any tax money. We have no taxes — this is taxpayer free. We have no taxpayer putting up $0.10 and I see right here. Just write it out. He said we need congressional approval. Well, we've many things at the White House over the years and they don't get congressional approval when they build it in the White House. It’s just totally separate, especially when it's a donation. I mean, the ballroom is a donation. It's gotten great reviews. People love it. And presidents for 150 years have wanted this ballroom to be built because what we have president Xi or other presidents or prime minister is coming, we don’t have a big room. We have the East Room, which is very small and he said we need congressional approval. He also said, but this is positive for us — I'm allowed — meaning we — are allowed to continue building necessary to — let's see — what is that to — safety and security of the White House and its grounds. So, it says here very carefully the safety and security have to be protected in the White House grounds. Well, that’s what we’re doing because everything's bulletproof glass and center and center, including the ballroom and it goes, construction and all of the things necessary, it says, personal safety of the President and his staff are a part of that. So, it talks about that we’re allowed to continue building. In other words, he put an order on and — even that, he gave 14 days. We don't need it. Because that's what we're doing. He’s allowed to continue building as necessary and when it talks about the safety and security of the White House and its grounds. So, just — so, you know, I wrote some of the things we a drone proof roof and it talks about the president and its staff. Well, we don’t have a lot of bulletproof glass. The White House was built a long time ago. This has the highest level of — in fact, they call this graph — this grass — this — the glass — it's been a bulletproof and its ballistic prove. It's very thick. It’s like that. And it's going 45 feet high and every window is covered, every door is covered. The roof is drone-proof. We have secure air handling systems. You know, bad things happen in the air if you have bad people. We have bio defense all over. We have a secure telecommunications and communications all over. We have bomb shelters that we're building. We have a hospital and very major medical facilities that we’re building. We have all of these things. So, that's called I'm allowed to continue building as necessary. So, think of that — for the safety of the President ---- so we have all these things. So, on that, we’re okay. Where he's totally wrong and he made in a statement, that's fine, but we're really — I’ll give you an example. You have right here, $300 to 400 million depending on finishes. If I use very expensive, marble, if I use very expensive wall coatings, if I — I could bring it up to 400. Otherwise, we're right now ahead of schedule, we’re under budget. But depending on finishes from $300 to 400 million are being given by great people — people that you all know — rich people, companies, big companies, they wanted to see this bill because every president literally for 150 years as needed a space like this. Many of you have got to that tent when we have president of a big country or somebody being honored of great distinction. And they said in a tent. And, if it rains, you get so because the grass gets wet here very fast. It's a very wet area. They used to call it a wetland, But I guess don't do that from the White House, but it's essentially a wetland. And when it rains, you're in trouble. the water can go up to 3 to 4 inches over their shoes. That's not a good feeling for prince — what — who was Prince Charles, who will — who will be here next couple of weeks — is King Charles, who’s a great guy. We don't want him to sit in a pool of water and they've been wanting this for 100 — think of it — 150 years and we’re building it and it’s covered perfectly. What's not covered perfectly is the fact that the judge said we need congressional approval. Many things have built in the White House. They haven’t gotten congressional approval, especially when the money is being not put up by the taxpayer. The taxpayers aren’t putting up a dime. This building was necessary for many years by the fact that I've many ballrooms and I’ve built many things that I know how to build. I’m not building the Federal Reserve where the guy’s spending $4 billion for a tiny little building — $4 billion for the federal reserve building. That contractor’s going to be one of the richest men anywhere in the world after he finishes the Federal Reserve. The man is totally incompetent. Jerome “Too Late” Powell is totally incompetent. And he’s got to get out of office pretty fast. He's doing a bad job, but he’s also done a bad job in shepherding the construction in that building. You know, they ripped down the part of that building and it was a nice — they say it’s one of the nicest buildings in Washington. They ripped it down. So — so, we feel and we don't feel, we know that congressional approval is not necessary to put up a ballroom and with many things they’ve built on the site they never got congressional approval especially with the money is all put up — this is all donations by people that love our country that love the White House and that feel it was very necessary.”
6:48

WATCH: Trump's full answer on the federal judge's ruling about the East Wing ballroom construction... .New York Post’s Steven Nelson: “A judge just ordered you to stop construction of the ballroom. Are you planning to stop?” President Trump: “Well, we’ll appeal, but it’s not — I don’t know — it’s basically — I mean, I wrote [sic] — I wrote [sic] wrote part of his opinion. But basically he’s saying I need congressional approval. And he's so wrong. This is being financed privately. It’s a donation that's being given by companies, very rich companies, very rich people, so that, for 150 years, they’ve wanted a ballroom here. We’re going to have the finest ballroom, I believe, anywhere in the world. And he said we need congressional approval. Well, they don’t give congressional approval from the White House when they do things — they don’t — especially when, you know, we didn't ask for any tax money. We have no taxes — this is taxpayer free. We have no taxpayer putting up $0.10 and I see right here. Just write it out. He said we need congressional approval. Well, we've many things at the White House over the years and they don't get congressional approval when they build it in the White House. It’s just totally separate, especially when it's a donation. I mean, the ballroom is a donation. It's gotten great reviews. People love it. And presidents for 150 years have wanted this ballroom to be built because what we have president Xi or other presidents or prime minister is coming, we don’t have a big room. We have the East Room, which is very small and he said we need congressional approval. He also said, but this is positive for us — I'm allowed — meaning we — are allowed to continue building necessary to — let's see — what is that to — safety and security of the White House and its grounds. So, it says here very carefully the safety and security have to be protected in the White House grounds. Well, that’s what we’re doing because everything's bulletproof glass and center and center, including the ballroom and it goes, construction and all of the things necessary, it says, personal safety of the President and his staff are a part of that. So, it talks about that we’re allowed to continue building. In other words, he put an order on and — even that, he gave 14 days. We don't need it. Because that's what we're doing. He’s allowed to continue building as necessary and when it talks about the safety and security of the White House and its grounds. So, just — so, you know, I wrote some of the things we a drone proof roof and it talks about the president and its staff. Well, we don’t have a lot of bulletproof glass. The White House was built a long time ago. This has the highest level of — in fact, they call this graph — this grass — this — the glass — it's been a bulletproof and its ballistic prove. It's very thick. It’s like that. And it's going 45 feet high and every window is covered, every door is covered. The roof is drone-proof. We have secure air handling systems. You know, bad things happen in the air if you have bad people. We have bio defense all over. We have a secure telecommunications and communications all over. We have bomb shelters that we're building. We have a hospital and very major medical facilities that we’re building. We have all of these things. So, that's called I'm allowed to continue building as necessary. So, think of that — for the safety of the President ---- so we have all these things. So, on that, we’re okay. Where he's totally wrong and he made in a statement, that's fine, but we're really — I’ll give you an example. You have right here, $300 to 400 million depending on finishes. If I use very expensive, marble, if I use very expensive wall coatings, if I — I could bring it up to 400. Otherwise, we're right now ahead of schedule, we’re under budget. But depending on finishes from $300 to 400 million are being given by great people — people that you all know — rich people, companies, big companies, they wanted to see this bill because every president literally for 150 years as needed a space like this. Many of you have got to that tent when we have president of a big country or somebody being honored of great distinction. And they said in a tent. And, if it rains, you get so because the grass gets wet here very fast. It's a very wet area. They used to call it a wetland, But I guess don't do that from the White House, but it's essentially a wetland. And when it rains, you're in trouble. the water can go up to 3 to 4 inches over their shoes. That's not a good feeling for prince — what — who was Prince Charles, who will — who will be here next couple of weeks — is King Charles, who’s a great guy. We don't want him to sit in a pool of water and they've been wanting this for 100 — think of it — 150 years and we’re building it and it’s covered perfectly. What's not covered perfectly is the fact that the judge said we need congressional approval. Many things have built in the White House. They haven’t gotten congressional approval, especially when the money is being not put up by the taxpayer. The taxpayers aren’t putting up a dime. This building was necessary for many years by the fact that I've many ballrooms and I’ve built many things that I know how to build. I’m not building the Federal Reserve where the guy’s spending $4 billion for a tiny little building — $4 billion for the federal reserve building. That contractor’s going to be one of the richest men anywhere in the world after he finishes the Federal Reserve. The man is totally incompetent. Jerome “Too Late” Powell is totally incompetent. And he’s got to get out of office pretty fast. He's doing a bad job, but he’s also done a bad job in shepherding the construction in that building. You know, they ripped down the part of that building and it was a nice — they say it’s one of the nicest buildings in Washington. They ripped it down. So — so, we feel and we don't feel, we know that congressional approval is not necessary to put up a ballroom and with many things they’ve built on the site they never got congressional approval especially with the money is all put up — this is all donations by people that love our country that love the White House and that feel it was very necessary.”

Curtis Houck

50,854 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

🚨PARENTS ENDANGER MILLIONS OF KIDS BY POSTING THEIR PHOTOS ONLINE | Paedophiles & Criminals Use A.I Parents who share their kids’ photos on social media are unwittingly exposing their children to serious dangers from child traffickers, paedophiles, criminals and cyber gangs armed with A.I tools. There are many SERIOUS RISKS involved, including: 1) Identity theft from photos and videos 2) Sexual exploitation and grooming 3) Cyberbullying 4) Doxing and Kidnapping Risk Shocking statistics from the Identity Theft Resource Center reveal that 1.3 million childrens' records are stolen each year in the US. The problem is getting worse with a 63% increase in cases from 2021 compared to 2019. And based on reports to authorities, these figures are just the tip of the iceberg! Tracy Kitten, an expert on online safety: “the picture our findings paint quickly becomes dark, grim, and scary.” Sexual predators are increasingly using AI to create CHILD SEX ABUSE CONTENT by applying deep-fake image generators. They use real pictures taken from social media and place these on child pornography from paedophile gangs. A.I can also be used to impersonate an individual’s voice which can be used for fraud, extortion and cyberbullying. Imagine your child’s voice being used to say embarrassing things, and then this is used to extort or bully them. Another risk is doxing (revealing one’s address or other personal details), something I have spoken about at length. A video or image can provide geolocation A.I tools with enough unique information to very accurately reveal the location where pictures or videos were taken. This data can then be used by human traffickers to plan a kidnapping of the child. Remember WSJ’s report last month about Instagram’s “VAST PAEDOPHILE NETWORK" seeking underage sexual content and activity? MY FRIEND AND HER 7 YEAR OLD SON: As I was writing this tweet, a close friend and employee sent me a message that made me sick. She saw her son (who I know extremely well) taking his t-shirt off while chatting online. When she checked his phone, he was in a Telegram group with other children and was being asked by a '6-year old girl' to send her nudes. The girl sent him nudes as well. Based on the chat and the style of writing, it was obvious to her this was an adult impersonating the girl in order to get naked photos of her son. She also told me about a common scam in which criminals use A.I voice generators to impersonate children, and call the grandparents pretending the child is in trouble (robbed/imprisoned/kidnapped), then requesting money to be transferred. Paedophelia, to me, is one of the most serious problems we face. Mix this with A.I. and we have a VERY MAJOR problem, one we are not yet ready for. The short video below sums up the tweet very well. Viewer discretion is advised. WHY IS THIS ISSUE NOT BEING TAKEN SERIOUSLY?
2:53

🚨PARENTS ENDANGER MILLIONS OF KIDS BY POSTING THEIR PHOTOS ONLINE | Paedophiles & Criminals Use A.I Parents who share their kids’ photos on social media are unwittingly exposing their children to serious dangers from child traffickers, paedophiles, criminals and cyber gangs armed with A.I tools. There are many SERIOUS RISKS involved, including: 1) Identity theft from photos and videos 2) Sexual exploitation and grooming 3) Cyberbullying 4) Doxing and Kidnapping Risk Shocking statistics from the Identity Theft Resource Center reveal that 1.3 million childrens' records are stolen each year in the US. The problem is getting worse with a 63% increase in cases from 2021 compared to 2019. And based on reports to authorities, these figures are just the tip of the iceberg! Tracy Kitten, an expert on online safety: “the picture our findings paint quickly becomes dark, grim, and scary.” Sexual predators are increasingly using AI to create CHILD SEX ABUSE CONTENT by applying deep-fake image generators. They use real pictures taken from social media and place these on child pornography from paedophile gangs. A.I can also be used to impersonate an individual’s voice which can be used for fraud, extortion and cyberbullying. Imagine your child’s voice being used to say embarrassing things, and then this is used to extort or bully them. Another risk is doxing (revealing one’s address or other personal details), something I have spoken about at length. A video or image can provide geolocation A.I tools with enough unique information to very accurately reveal the location where pictures or videos were taken. This data can then be used by human traffickers to plan a kidnapping of the child. Remember WSJ’s report last month about Instagram’s “VAST PAEDOPHILE NETWORK" seeking underage sexual content and activity? MY FRIEND AND HER 7 YEAR OLD SON: As I was writing this tweet, a close friend and employee sent me a message that made me sick. She saw her son (who I know extremely well) taking his t-shirt off while chatting online. When she checked his phone, he was in a Telegram group with other children and was being asked by a '6-year old girl' to send her nudes. The girl sent him nudes as well. Based on the chat and the style of writing, it was obvious to her this was an adult impersonating the girl in order to get naked photos of her son. She also told me about a common scam in which criminals use A.I voice generators to impersonate children, and call the grandparents pretending the child is in trouble (robbed/imprisoned/kidnapped), then requesting money to be transferred. Paedophelia, to me, is one of the most serious problems we face. Mix this with A.I. and we have a VERY MAJOR problem, one we are not yet ready for. The short video below sums up the tweet very well. Viewer discretion is advised. WHY IS THIS ISSUE NOT BEING TAKEN SERIOUSLY?

Mario Nawfal

1,245,710 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 One man drew a map of things no eye had ever seen. The buried country beneath England itself. William Smith was a blacksmith's son from a small Oxfordshire village. His father died when he was 8. The village school taught him little, so he bought his own books and taught himself the surveyor's trade. By 18 the work was sending him down the coal pits of Somerset. And down in the dark, the ground showed him its secret. ⛏️ The rock lay in layers, stacked like the pages of a book. Always the same layers, always in the same order. And each layer held its own fossils, like a signature in the stone. Read the signature and you knew exactly which page of England you stood on. So he set out to map the whole buried country. No patron. No academy. By coach, on horseback and on foot, for the best part of 15 years. In 1815 he unrolled the answer: a map 8 and a half feet by 6, every buried layer of England and Wales tinted by his own hand. The first detailed geological map of any country on Earth. 📜 It barely sold. A failed quarry venture ate what the travel had not. He sold his life's fossil collection to the British Museum for £700 and it still was not enough. In 1819 the King's Bench debtors' prison closed its gates on the man who had mapped a country. He walked out that summer to bailiffs seizing his home, and left London with his tools on his back. London's Geological Society, a club of gentlemen, had never asked him to join. In 1820 its president, George Greenough, published a grand map of his own. Smith's hard-won lines ran through it. His name appeared nowhere on it. 🔥 But younger geologists knew exactly whose lines they were walking. In 1831 the same Society struck its first Wollaston Medal, its highest honour, and the first name called was William Smith. Its president, Adam Sedgwick, named him the Father of English Geology. The King granted him a pension of £100 a year. 🏛️ His map hangs today in the Society's own hall in London. And every geological map on Earth is built on what he drew. 🇬🇧 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Somewhere in Britain today, a child pulls a fossil from a hillside. Because of a blacksmith's son, we can tell them exactly what they hold. We hand his story to them free, so they grow up knowing it. We are the home of British heroes. There is a place for you in it. 👉 👈 Be part of us. ☝️🇬🇧 Be Proud Of Us. 🙏🇬🇧
2:41

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 One man drew a map of things no eye had ever seen. The buried country beneath England itself. William Smith was a blacksmith's son from a small Oxfordshire village. His father died when he was 8. The village school taught him little, so he bought his own books and taught himself the surveyor's trade. By 18 the work was sending him down the coal pits of Somerset. And down in the dark, the ground showed him its secret. ⛏️ The rock lay in layers, stacked like the pages of a book. Always the same layers, always in the same order. And each layer held its own fossils, like a signature in the stone. Read the signature and you knew exactly which page of England you stood on. So he set out to map the whole buried country. No patron. No academy. By coach, on horseback and on foot, for the best part of 15 years. In 1815 he unrolled the answer: a map 8 and a half feet by 6, every buried layer of England and Wales tinted by his own hand. The first detailed geological map of any country on Earth. 📜 It barely sold. A failed quarry venture ate what the travel had not. He sold his life's fossil collection to the British Museum for £700 and it still was not enough. In 1819 the King's Bench debtors' prison closed its gates on the man who had mapped a country. He walked out that summer to bailiffs seizing his home, and left London with his tools on his back. London's Geological Society, a club of gentlemen, had never asked him to join. In 1820 its president, George Greenough, published a grand map of his own. Smith's hard-won lines ran through it. His name appeared nowhere on it. 🔥 But younger geologists knew exactly whose lines they were walking. In 1831 the same Society struck its first Wollaston Medal, its highest honour, and the first name called was William Smith. Its president, Adam Sedgwick, named him the Father of English Geology. The King granted him a pension of £100 a year. 🏛️ His map hangs today in the Society's own hall in London. And every geological map on Earth is built on what he drew. 🇬🇧 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Somewhere in Britain today, a child pulls a fossil from a hillside. Because of a blacksmith's son, we can tell them exactly what they hold. We hand his story to them free, so they grow up knowing it. We are the home of British heroes. There is a place for you in it. 👉 👈 Be part of us. ☝️🇬🇧 Be Proud Of Us. 🙏🇬🇧

Proudofus.uk

52,141 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Cancer and AIDS research titan Dr. David Rasnick: "[The Covid injections are] a weapon... It's really a population reduction program, globally... it's murder...[But] how do you kill billions of people? You can't just use one weapon. You have to use a whole bunch of weapons." This clip of Dr. David Rasnick, Ph.D, an expert in clinical diagnostics, drug design, and AIDS, as well as a former employee of Abbot Labs and founder of multiple biotech companies, is taken from an interview with Richie Brown (RichieBrownShow🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿) posted to Rumble in October 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- Brown: "So what do you think the vaccines are about? Was it purely a money making exercise or—" Dr. Rasnick: "No, it's a weapon... Sure, they make money and everything. They're really, literally, and this is the game plan, they're really trying to reduce the global population. Open about this for decades, you know, I mean nobody's made an issue. It's like what I've been doing has been open for decades fighting the AIDS onion. But people don't know about it because it's not publicized, you see? "And the other thing is that the bad guys can be very open about what they want to do because they control all the media. It's not going to get published. It's really a population reduction program globally, it's a global population program. It's criminal, it's murder. I have no qualms at all. I'll go in the courtroom and swear to that. And I can prove it with the evidence, [with] their own documents. "But not just the vaccine. It's the whole setup. I mean it's omni-war, which means they're using every weapon they can think of. They're using injections, they're putting poisons in the atmosphere, in the water, in the food. Trying to starve people to death. Kill all the animals, chickens and cows and ostriches in some places they're trying to kill. I mean it's a multi. How do you kill billions of people? You can't just use one weapon. You have to use a whole bunch of weapons. "And that the injections they're pushing it. You know, I forget how many billions of people have been injected with the SARS-CoV-2 stuff. And now, again, I mean hundreds of different kinds of lots. And they're probably putting and changing things all the time. And I've been following that stuff. I mean cancer is really, really a big problem from being injected on top of all the other things like heart problems, neurological problems, people are still dropping dead like flies all across the United States."
1:59

Cancer and AIDS research titan Dr. David Rasnick: "[The Covid injections are] a weapon... It's really a population reduction program, globally... it's murder...[But] how do you kill billions of people? You can't just use one weapon. You have to use a whole bunch of weapons." This clip of Dr. David Rasnick, Ph.D, an expert in clinical diagnostics, drug design, and AIDS, as well as a former employee of Abbot Labs and founder of multiple biotech companies, is taken from an interview with Richie Brown (RichieBrownShow🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿) posted to Rumble in October 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- Brown: "So what do you think the vaccines are about? Was it purely a money making exercise or—" Dr. Rasnick: "No, it's a weapon... Sure, they make money and everything. They're really, literally, and this is the game plan, they're really trying to reduce the global population. Open about this for decades, you know, I mean nobody's made an issue. It's like what I've been doing has been open for decades fighting the AIDS onion. But people don't know about it because it's not publicized, you see? "And the other thing is that the bad guys can be very open about what they want to do because they control all the media. It's not going to get published. It's really a population reduction program globally, it's a global population program. It's criminal, it's murder. I have no qualms at all. I'll go in the courtroom and swear to that. And I can prove it with the evidence, [with] their own documents. "But not just the vaccine. It's the whole setup. I mean it's omni-war, which means they're using every weapon they can think of. They're using injections, they're putting poisons in the atmosphere, in the water, in the food. Trying to starve people to death. Kill all the animals, chickens and cows and ostriches in some places they're trying to kill. I mean it's a multi. How do you kill billions of people? You can't just use one weapon. You have to use a whole bunch of weapons. "And that the injections they're pushing it. You know, I forget how many billions of people have been injected with the SARS-CoV-2 stuff. And now, again, I mean hundreds of different kinds of lots. And they're probably putting and changing things all the time. And I've been following that stuff. I mean cancer is really, really a big problem from being injected on top of all the other things like heart problems, neurological problems, people are still dropping dead like flies all across the United States."

Sense Receptor

11,817 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 🇬🇧 Why aren't all the patriotic flag wavers upset that Nathan Gill who went from UKIP ⏩ Brexit Party ⏩ Reform UK has admitted to taking bribes to speak pro Russian and anti- EU statements? Photo collage ➡️ Oleg Voloshyn and his wife Nadia Borodi ➡️ Nigel Farage with Nadia Borodi ➡️ Nathan Gill with Nadia Borodi ➡️ Nigel Farage with Nathan Gill In 2022 the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned Voloshyn under Executive Order 14024 for "having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the Government of the Russian Federation" His wife Nadia Borodi served as a presenter on pro-Kremlin TV channels -NewsOne, Channel 112 Ukraine- supporting Russia's annexation of Crimea, separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, and criticism of Ukraine's pro-Western government. She's been labeled a "Russian propagandist" and placed her "at the heart of Russian influence networks in Europe" Videos: 1⃣ Richard Tice, Nathan Gill and Nigel Farage standing on stage calling for Brexit 2⃣ Nigel Farage praising Nathan Gill as honourable and loyal 3⃣ Richard Tice introducing Nathan Gill on stage 4⃣ Nathan Gill and Nigel Farage at a UKIP event 5⃣ Nathan Gill praising Nigel Farage's leadership What have these three men achieved? ↘️ Told us leaving the EU would make us stronger, it's made the UK weaker and it's made the EU weaker ↘️ Who wins with a weaker UK and EU? Russia Your reminder of what Nigel Farage said: ➡️ 2016, "We'd be better off, we'd be a happier place" ➡️ 2016, "Worst case economically is better than where we are today" ➡️ 2016, "The sun has risen on an independent UK, and I could not be happier" ➡️ 2023, "Brexit has failed" ➡️2023, "We were more competitive as members of the EU" Nathan Gill, Richard Tice and Nigel Farage have known one another and campaigned together to leave the EU for at least ten years One of them was paid by Russia to speak anti EU statements As a society we can keep blaming legal immigrants and be side tracked by asylum seekers, or we can focus on government policies which since 2010 have underfunded public services under the Conservatives and continue to underfund public services under Labour If you want to blame legal immigrants and asylum seekers for government policy, not only will that not solve the problem of underfunded services, but it will not solve the problem Proud of being English or British, waving our flags, means having the integrity to get upset when we find out that one of the three men was paid by Russia to speak anti-EU statements and to weaken the UK And it also begs the question why the other two men - who weren't taking bribes from Russia - were saying the same anti EU things as the one who was taking bribes from Russia If patriotism means we can understand that England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿works well as part of the United Kingdom🇬🇧 Patriotism also means that the UK 🇬🇧 can work well as part of the European Union 🇪🇺 There's a reason why Ukraine 🇺🇦 has been fighting for years against Russia 🇷🇺, and why Ukraine - Europes biggest freedom fighters are fighting to join the European Union 🇪🇺 The EU 🇪🇺 is not perfect, and like any organisation it has its flaws. But we surely we should express our sovereign independent minds and be part of the European Union where we can shape conversation and policy on our continent, with our neighbours better? Or we can carry on with Brexit, and the weakening of the UK and the EU, the thing that Nathan Gill who went from UKIP ⏩ Brexit Party ⏩ Reform UK was paid to do by Russia Let's make better choices. Let's call our Russian influence on a British politician, Nathan Gill, and let's do the opposite of what Russia wants, and make a stronger Europe by rejoining the European Union #RejoinEU
1:08

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 🇬🇧 Why aren't all the patriotic flag wavers upset that Nathan Gill who went from UKIP ⏩ Brexit Party ⏩ Reform UK has admitted to taking bribes to speak pro Russian and anti- EU statements? Photo collage ➡️ Oleg Voloshyn and his wife Nadia Borodi ➡️ Nigel Farage with Nadia Borodi ➡️ Nathan Gill with Nadia Borodi ➡️ Nigel Farage with Nathan Gill In 2022 the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned Voloshyn under Executive Order 14024 for "having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the Government of the Russian Federation" His wife Nadia Borodi served as a presenter on pro-Kremlin TV channels -NewsOne, Channel 112 Ukraine- supporting Russia's annexation of Crimea, separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, and criticism of Ukraine's pro-Western government. She's been labeled a "Russian propagandist" and placed her "at the heart of Russian influence networks in Europe" Videos: 1⃣ Richard Tice, Nathan Gill and Nigel Farage standing on stage calling for Brexit 2⃣ Nigel Farage praising Nathan Gill as honourable and loyal 3⃣ Richard Tice introducing Nathan Gill on stage 4⃣ Nathan Gill and Nigel Farage at a UKIP event 5⃣ Nathan Gill praising Nigel Farage's leadership What have these three men achieved? ↘️ Told us leaving the EU would make us stronger, it's made the UK weaker and it's made the EU weaker ↘️ Who wins with a weaker UK and EU? Russia Your reminder of what Nigel Farage said: ➡️ 2016, "We'd be better off, we'd be a happier place" ➡️ 2016, "Worst case economically is better than where we are today" ➡️ 2016, "The sun has risen on an independent UK, and I could not be happier" ➡️ 2023, "Brexit has failed" ➡️2023, "We were more competitive as members of the EU" Nathan Gill, Richard Tice and Nigel Farage have known one another and campaigned together to leave the EU for at least ten years One of them was paid by Russia to speak anti EU statements As a society we can keep blaming legal immigrants and be side tracked by asylum seekers, or we can focus on government policies which since 2010 have underfunded public services under the Conservatives and continue to underfund public services under Labour If you want to blame legal immigrants and asylum seekers for government policy, not only will that not solve the problem of underfunded services, but it will not solve the problem Proud of being English or British, waving our flags, means having the integrity to get upset when we find out that one of the three men was paid by Russia to speak anti-EU statements and to weaken the UK And it also begs the question why the other two men - who weren't taking bribes from Russia - were saying the same anti EU things as the one who was taking bribes from Russia If patriotism means we can understand that England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿works well as part of the United Kingdom🇬🇧 Patriotism also means that the UK 🇬🇧 can work well as part of the European Union 🇪🇺 There's a reason why Ukraine 🇺🇦 has been fighting for years against Russia 🇷🇺, and why Ukraine - Europes biggest freedom fighters are fighting to join the European Union 🇪🇺 The EU 🇪🇺 is not perfect, and like any organisation it has its flaws. But we surely we should express our sovereign independent minds and be part of the European Union where we can shape conversation and policy on our continent, with our neighbours better? Or we can carry on with Brexit, and the weakening of the UK and the EU, the thing that Nathan Gill who went from UKIP ⏩ Brexit Party ⏩ Reform UK was paid to do by Russia Let's make better choices. Let's call our Russian influence on a British politician, Nathan Gill, and let's do the opposite of what Russia wants, and make a stronger Europe by rejoining the European Union #RejoinEU

Farrukh

46,362 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

An impassioned post from the Yorkshire Dales Moorland Group: Wildfire or managed fire, how can this be a contentious choice with all that's happening? Out of control fires are raging not just in Europe but in the UK. Thousands of homes have been evacuated, some have burned to the ground. Landscapes and habitats have been destroyed, possibly irrevocably, and heartbreakingly deaths have occurred. Reports have come in of Greek firefighters losing their lives trying to extinguish wildfires on the island of Crete. How can anyone ignore these events and advocate ideological policies for the UK uplands that directly increase wildfire risk? IF you didn't know, that's exactly what's happening. Yes we know, its utterly bewildering. Wildfire is a very real and growing threat here in the UK, we shouldn't need anymore evidence - its happening right now. These fires need only two things - fuel and an ignition source. The imposed land policies in place for the uplands are providing that fuel, all that's needed is the ignition and there is an increasing list of possibilities where that ignition will come from. Arguments can rage about how fires start but they all share one common denominator - FUEL. Currently in the UK we have landscape policy makers at DEFRA and NE who have absolutely no knowledge of working in the rural sector, particularly in the uplands. They have no practical, hands-on experience of actually managing vegetation or mitigating against wildfires and they certainly do not have any skills or expertise in fighting them. So why is there no collaborative engagement between the boots on the ground personnel and those in the government offices? Answers on a post card please. When these fires break out DEFRA and NE officials are invisible. They conveniently disappear entrusting the fire fighting to the local gamekeepers, farmers, volunteers and regional fire crews They might as well say "you WILL have this fuel thrust upon you and you WILL be expected to put it out". There is a choice that can be made to reduce these horrendous fire incidents and its right under the government's noses. Bring back controlled burning into our landscapes. Let the experts with the land based knowledge get back to what they showed in the past works in mitigating against these disasters. Let the moor managers create the fire breaks they once did using controlled burning techniques. Let them get back on top of fire prone vegetation just as they did before this woke rewilding ideology of leaving moorland plants to grow unchecked was added to the upland agenda. Policy makers don't seem to want to listen so here is a video showing what controlled burning actually looks like. Watch it and tell us it damages peat. You will not be able to.
0:22

An impassioned post from the Yorkshire Dales Moorland Group: Wildfire or managed fire, how can this be a contentious choice with all that's happening? Out of control fires are raging not just in Europe but in the UK. Thousands of homes have been evacuated, some have burned to the ground. Landscapes and habitats have been destroyed, possibly irrevocably, and heartbreakingly deaths have occurred. Reports have come in of Greek firefighters losing their lives trying to extinguish wildfires on the island of Crete. How can anyone ignore these events and advocate ideological policies for the UK uplands that directly increase wildfire risk? IF you didn't know, that's exactly what's happening. Yes we know, its utterly bewildering. Wildfire is a very real and growing threat here in the UK, we shouldn't need anymore evidence - its happening right now. These fires need only two things - fuel and an ignition source. The imposed land policies in place for the uplands are providing that fuel, all that's needed is the ignition and there is an increasing list of possibilities where that ignition will come from. Arguments can rage about how fires start but they all share one common denominator - FUEL. Currently in the UK we have landscape policy makers at DEFRA and NE who have absolutely no knowledge of working in the rural sector, particularly in the uplands. They have no practical, hands-on experience of actually managing vegetation or mitigating against wildfires and they certainly do not have any skills or expertise in fighting them. So why is there no collaborative engagement between the boots on the ground personnel and those in the government offices? Answers on a post card please. When these fires break out DEFRA and NE officials are invisible. They conveniently disappear entrusting the fire fighting to the local gamekeepers, farmers, volunteers and regional fire crews They might as well say "you WILL have this fuel thrust upon you and you WILL be expected to put it out". There is a choice that can be made to reduce these horrendous fire incidents and its right under the government's noses. Bring back controlled burning into our landscapes. Let the experts with the land based knowledge get back to what they showed in the past works in mitigating against these disasters. Let the moor managers create the fire breaks they once did using controlled burning techniques. Let them get back on top of fire prone vegetation just as they did before this woke rewilding ideology of leaving moorland plants to grow unchecked was added to the upland agenda. Policy makers don't seem to want to listen so here is a video showing what controlled burning actually looks like. Watch it and tell us it damages peat. You will not be able to.

Moorland Association

32,333 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

Oxford professor John Lennox on testing the reality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: "Now, my final point is this. I'm a scientist of sorts, and people say to me, 'Come on. You can't believe this stuff.' Because in science and practical science you do experiments. You test your hypothesis. Christianity is not testable. Isn't it? Isn't it? You see, the difference between the two last things I read were the difference between seeing something, those grave cloths, and working out an intellectual conclusion that something utterly remarkable has happened. That's not quite the same thing as meeting the risen Jesus. And you see, ladies and gentlemen, if it is true that Jesus rose from the dead, then He's still alive, and it's possible to meet Him. Now, you can do an experiment, and it's this—this Jesus who claims to be risen tells us that if we're prepared to trust Him, repent of the mess we've made of our own lives, and the lives of other people, and we're prepared to receive Him as Lord and Controller of life as the risen Son of God, then He will give us forgiveness. Does the word forgiveness mean anything to you? He'll give us new life and a new power... Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is the test...When you see people with narcotic or alcohol dependence, and they've no food to put on the table in front of their children, and you meet them then a year later, and something has happened. You say, 'What's happened to you?' and they say something like, 'Well, I met Jesus,' or 'I became a Christian,' or they'll put it different ways. When you see that again and again, you add two and two to get four. I wouldn't sit here for a nanosecond if I didn't believe that not only is the resurrection of Jesus intellectually credible, but I believe it's existentially credible because the center part of my life and that of my wife and family is to walk with Him from day to day. Now, that may sound absolute jargon and mumbo-jumbo to you, but we're living in a universe where we discover that we are persons, and every analogy we know tells us that our origin cannot be sub-personal. It's supra-personal. And if we enjoy human friendship, what a magnificent thing it is if God makes a way where we can through faith in Christ become His sons and daughters and enjoy the biggest friendship and the most exciting friendship in the universe, and that is friendship with the risen Christ."
3:57

Oxford professor John Lennox on testing the reality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: "Now, my final point is this. I'm a scientist of sorts, and people say to me, 'Come on. You can't believe this stuff.' Because in science and practical science you do experiments. You test your hypothesis. Christianity is not testable. Isn't it? Isn't it? You see, the difference between the two last things I read were the difference between seeing something, those grave cloths, and working out an intellectual conclusion that something utterly remarkable has happened. That's not quite the same thing as meeting the risen Jesus. And you see, ladies and gentlemen, if it is true that Jesus rose from the dead, then He's still alive, and it's possible to meet Him. Now, you can do an experiment, and it's this—this Jesus who claims to be risen tells us that if we're prepared to trust Him, repent of the mess we've made of our own lives, and the lives of other people, and we're prepared to receive Him as Lord and Controller of life as the risen Son of God, then He will give us forgiveness. Does the word forgiveness mean anything to you? He'll give us new life and a new power... Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is the test...When you see people with narcotic or alcohol dependence, and they've no food to put on the table in front of their children, and you meet them then a year later, and something has happened. You say, 'What's happened to you?' and they say something like, 'Well, I met Jesus,' or 'I became a Christian,' or they'll put it different ways. When you see that again and again, you add two and two to get four. I wouldn't sit here for a nanosecond if I didn't believe that not only is the resurrection of Jesus intellectually credible, but I believe it's existentially credible because the center part of my life and that of my wife and family is to walk with Him from day to day. Now, that may sound absolute jargon and mumbo-jumbo to you, but we're living in a universe where we discover that we are persons, and every analogy we know tells us that our origin cannot be sub-personal. It's supra-personal. And if we enjoy human friendship, what a magnificent thing it is if God makes a way where we can through faith in Christ become His sons and daughters and enjoy the biggest friendship and the most exciting friendship in the universe, and that is friendship with the risen Christ."

Melissa the Hopeful🏠Homemaker

212,149 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

"I remember feeling very tired mentally, four days of sort of leading the tournament. I won the week before in Greensboro so I’d had a lot of media attention that week and so people forget that. You know to win two in a row is not always easy and then the Masters, I was late, day one, and there was no late and early times you get the first Tour. It was either if you score well the first round and you’re late, you’ll be late the second day so I was late the third day and then was obviously last off with Crenshaw. So mentally it was getting quite tiring because the course was very dry and it was just holding on because you had these four footers. You keep getting, keep making them and then you know, and then obviously I had a bit of a hiccup at 11th and 12th. Things didn’t go well there so now I was on the hunt to try and get that few shots back off Calcavecchia and it had come at holes that I thought wouldn’t happen. I thought 13th I can maybe get a birdie, and I had a good tee shot. I had 165 for my second shot, to give you some idea how good the tee shot was, and I still made par which was annoying. I made it close at 14th from about eight feet and I missed that for birdie, and I didn’t make birdie at 15th with a second shot just off the back of the green so I’m thinking you know, the chances are gone, a bit thin, and then you go and birdie 16th from above the hole which wasn’t quite, was on the gameplan but I’ll take it. And then the 18th, we all know that it was in the bunker and then got it out the bunker fairly successfully, and then – talking about the putts you have to hole to win, that was an eighteen, eighteen feet I think it was, the putt. Doesn’t look like it on TV, looks like about six feet and I got the memories of Trevino always saying if you’re going to have to win a tournament or a winning putt, he said I’d rather have a downhill putt than I would have a twenty foot putt uphill when you’ve actually physically got to hit it. So obviously I’m putting downhill all the way so to me, I’d had probably ten minutes to read the line. I don’t know if it was a good thing or a bad thing. You get too many ideas in your mind because Crenshaw was butchering the hole at the time and he was putting out and da da, so I was waiting for ages and that just took about a four inch back swing, if that, and just started the ball rolling and obviously we know it went in the can. I was saying to myself, thank **** I’m not going down the 10th on the play-off because I’d got no legs left." Sandy Lyle looks back on his win at The Masters in 1988, where he became the first Scottish player to win at Augusta National and became a two-time Major champion 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 #TheMasters
3:20

"I remember feeling very tired mentally, four days of sort of leading the tournament. I won the week before in Greensboro so I’d had a lot of media attention that week and so people forget that. You know to win two in a row is not always easy and then the Masters, I was late, day one, and there was no late and early times you get the first Tour. It was either if you score well the first round and you’re late, you’ll be late the second day so I was late the third day and then was obviously last off with Crenshaw. So mentally it was getting quite tiring because the course was very dry and it was just holding on because you had these four footers. You keep getting, keep making them and then you know, and then obviously I had a bit of a hiccup at 11th and 12th. Things didn’t go well there so now I was on the hunt to try and get that few shots back off Calcavecchia and it had come at holes that I thought wouldn’t happen. I thought 13th I can maybe get a birdie, and I had a good tee shot. I had 165 for my second shot, to give you some idea how good the tee shot was, and I still made par which was annoying. I made it close at 14th from about eight feet and I missed that for birdie, and I didn’t make birdie at 15th with a second shot just off the back of the green so I’m thinking you know, the chances are gone, a bit thin, and then you go and birdie 16th from above the hole which wasn’t quite, was on the gameplan but I’ll take it. And then the 18th, we all know that it was in the bunker and then got it out the bunker fairly successfully, and then – talking about the putts you have to hole to win, that was an eighteen, eighteen feet I think it was, the putt. Doesn’t look like it on TV, looks like about six feet and I got the memories of Trevino always saying if you’re going to have to win a tournament or a winning putt, he said I’d rather have a downhill putt than I would have a twenty foot putt uphill when you’ve actually physically got to hit it. So obviously I’m putting downhill all the way so to me, I’d had probably ten minutes to read the line. I don’t know if it was a good thing or a bad thing. You get too many ideas in your mind because Crenshaw was butchering the hole at the time and he was putting out and da da, so I was waiting for ages and that just took about a four inch back swing, if that, and just started the ball rolling and obviously we know it went in the can. I was saying to myself, thank **** I’m not going down the 10th on the play-off because I’d got no legs left." Sandy Lyle looks back on his win at The Masters in 1988, where he became the first Scottish player to win at Augusta National and became a two-time Major champion 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 #TheMasters

DP World Tour

27,380 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

This labour government has decided taxing imaginary things is a good idea. But, if they get away with it and pass this law, they won't stop at taxing unrealised capital gains in superfunds over $3 million. Their insane tax programme will be expanded. This new cook-up is just a Trojan horse. It just attacks a very small and obscure area of the financial world. They expect very little resistance form the public, and very little opposition from the people paid to provide opposition. Similar things have been done in the UK, and it has caused chaos. Millionaires, business people, entrepreneurs and productive people are leaving the country in droves. They’re running to places where they feel more welcome. They take opportunity with them. There are many areas where this dangerous new tax on a concept rather than actual money will have deep impact. It hits the stock market, as well as property market which will in fact impact everyone’s super not just the wealthy. Most importantly this will impact food production. Big chunks of land tend to appreciate in value. The value increase has been accelerating as the value of the dollar declines. This means family farms, held in super accounts, will be taxed heavily. Because value is relative and imaginary, there is no clear formula or predictability to the scale and timing of capital gains. Somebody will have to pay the cash tax, on an asset not sold. The imagined gain. Ludicrous. There are two ways this can be achieved, through using profits from operating the farm, or selling the farm. So many family farms invest everything they have into fences, feed, seed, fuel and equipment. When conditions are good, there is some money to be made, when the two major supermarkets are not busy pummelling them. There is even the odd export dollar. But it is not as if it isn’t already hard enough for family farmers here in Australia. Between the droughts and flooding rain, they fight to keep their farm lands free of power lines and electricity windmills. Fighting pests and regulations. Fighting to pay the energy bills. Fighting for access to water. Now they will be fighting to pay for imagined gains with real cash. This means an increase in the cost of food for the rest of us. That, and more corporatism in the farming sector, as more family farms are gobbled up by foreign corporations and big capital. Bad leaders can cause shortages where there was once effortless abundance. Albanese, Chalmers and friends are bad leaders. Short sighted and greedy. Playing divisive politics, as they seemingly tax the rich to give to the poor. The reality is they will just destroy more decent Aussie family farms, and everything that goes with it. The rest of us will pay more for our food. Australia can’t afford three years of this nonsense. No farmers, no food. I just want Australia back.
1:12

This labour government has decided taxing imaginary things is a good idea. But, if they get away with it and pass this law, they won't stop at taxing unrealised capital gains in superfunds over $3 million. Their insane tax programme will be expanded. This new cook-up is just a Trojan horse. It just attacks a very small and obscure area of the financial world. They expect very little resistance form the public, and very little opposition from the people paid to provide opposition. Similar things have been done in the UK, and it has caused chaos. Millionaires, business people, entrepreneurs and productive people are leaving the country in droves. They’re running to places where they feel more welcome. They take opportunity with them. There are many areas where this dangerous new tax on a concept rather than actual money will have deep impact. It hits the stock market, as well as property market which will in fact impact everyone’s super not just the wealthy. Most importantly this will impact food production. Big chunks of land tend to appreciate in value. The value increase has been accelerating as the value of the dollar declines. This means family farms, held in super accounts, will be taxed heavily. Because value is relative and imaginary, there is no clear formula or predictability to the scale and timing of capital gains. Somebody will have to pay the cash tax, on an asset not sold. The imagined gain. Ludicrous. There are two ways this can be achieved, through using profits from operating the farm, or selling the farm. So many family farms invest everything they have into fences, feed, seed, fuel and equipment. When conditions are good, there is some money to be made, when the two major supermarkets are not busy pummelling them. There is even the odd export dollar. But it is not as if it isn’t already hard enough for family farmers here in Australia. Between the droughts and flooding rain, they fight to keep their farm lands free of power lines and electricity windmills. Fighting pests and regulations. Fighting to pay the energy bills. Fighting for access to water. Now they will be fighting to pay for imagined gains with real cash. This means an increase in the cost of food for the rest of us. That, and more corporatism in the farming sector, as more family farms are gobbled up by foreign corporations and big capital. Bad leaders can cause shortages where there was once effortless abundance. Albanese, Chalmers and friends are bad leaders. Short sighted and greedy. Playing divisive politics, as they seemingly tax the rich to give to the poor. The reality is they will just destroy more decent Aussie family farms, and everything that goes with it. The rest of us will pay more for our food. Australia can’t afford three years of this nonsense. No farmers, no food. I just want Australia back.

Matthew Camenzuli

52,797 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

a compilation of wonbin’s kindness, warmth & thoughtfulness • on roads where people are constantly passing by, wonbin quietly picks up tissues from the ground. • at the 2025 MMA, wonbin helped clean up confetti. • at nct wish’s concert, wonbin even helped pick up water bottles. • when the stage floor gets slippery, wonbin crouches down first to help staff wipe off the water. • when wonbin notices staff blocking fans from taking photos, he quietly changes his position so fans can still get a shot. • when wonbin sees a fan drop their phone, he keeps singing while calling staff to check on it. • after opening magazines, wonbin remembers to neatly put the packaging back. • while practicing taekwondo and breaking wooden boards, he worried the boards might hurt the coach or staff. • when a member silently cried, he gently handed them a water bottle and comforted them. • at the airport, when someone’s slipper came off, he was seen looking around at people’s feet as if he was ready to help return it. • there was once a fan in a wheelchair with limited visibility. after staff adjusted her position and informed riize, wonbin said he wanted to meet her in person. they later met backstage, where he shared that he receives energy from fans and that it felt meaningful to exchange that energy with them. • before recording, he carefully checked the stage floor with staff because the friction was too strong and powder was needed for safety. • non-fans once shouted, “wonbin, you’re handsome!” and he politely bowed in response. • during salon drip, wonbin let senior doyeon choose the welcome drink first. • a former elementary school classmate shared that wonbin was already a quiet and kind kid back then. he used to play guitar, sometimes brought his acoustic guitar to school, was very fast and often participated in relay races, and would even take the stairs two or three steps at a time. they also remembered how naturally he got along with everyone, and how he and his friends kindly looked after a classmate with an intellectual disability. • wonbin often talked with an SM japanese trainee who didn’t have many close friends at the company and usually spent time alone. even then, wonbin would naturally start conversations with them first. it’s heartwarming to know that the way he is now… has always been who he is. wonbin has always quietly been a kind and genuinely good person. liking wonbin really feels like a blessing. there are so many things we can learn from him. such a well-mannered, kind, and inspiring person 🩷 #WONBIN #원빈
2:34

a compilation of wonbin’s kindness, warmth & thoughtfulness • on roads where people are constantly passing by, wonbin quietly picks up tissues from the ground. • at the 2025 MMA, wonbin helped clean up confetti. • at nct wish’s concert, wonbin even helped pick up water bottles. • when the stage floor gets slippery, wonbin crouches down first to help staff wipe off the water. • when wonbin notices staff blocking fans from taking photos, he quietly changes his position so fans can still get a shot. • when wonbin sees a fan drop their phone, he keeps singing while calling staff to check on it. • after opening magazines, wonbin remembers to neatly put the packaging back. • while practicing taekwondo and breaking wooden boards, he worried the boards might hurt the coach or staff. • when a member silently cried, he gently handed them a water bottle and comforted them. • at the airport, when someone’s slipper came off, he was seen looking around at people’s feet as if he was ready to help return it. • there was once a fan in a wheelchair with limited visibility. after staff adjusted her position and informed riize, wonbin said he wanted to meet her in person. they later met backstage, where he shared that he receives energy from fans and that it felt meaningful to exchange that energy with them. • before recording, he carefully checked the stage floor with staff because the friction was too strong and powder was needed for safety. • non-fans once shouted, “wonbin, you’re handsome!” and he politely bowed in response. • during salon drip, wonbin let senior doyeon choose the welcome drink first. • a former elementary school classmate shared that wonbin was already a quiet and kind kid back then. he used to play guitar, sometimes brought his acoustic guitar to school, was very fast and often participated in relay races, and would even take the stairs two or three steps at a time. they also remembered how naturally he got along with everyone, and how he and his friends kindly looked after a classmate with an intellectual disability. • wonbin often talked with an SM japanese trainee who didn’t have many close friends at the company and usually spent time alone. even then, wonbin would naturally start conversations with them first. it’s heartwarming to know that the way he is now… has always been who he is. wonbin has always quietly been a kind and genuinely good person. liking wonbin really feels like a blessing. there are so many things we can learn from him. such a well-mannered, kind, and inspiring person 🩷 #WONBIN #원빈

원빈시

63,377 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Everyone should read this because it is a microcosm of why everything has gone to shit. This is how his malignant narcissism destroys everything he touches. “We built an aircraft carrier for $19 billion, which is crazy. The price is crazy. It started off at-- I came in one of the first things I want to see. It was the Ford aircraft carrier. It was way over budget. And it had things on it that you didn't need. Like it had magnet. It magnets to lift up the elevators with 10 and 12 planes on them. Think of it. It had all sorts of modern day things that were all instead of using steam for the catapult. They used electric. Let's have an electric catapult. And so what I went to the ship, because I came into office and the ship was way over budget. Built a new produce, unfortunately. It was way over budget. It was going to cost $3 billion. It was up to like $18, $19. It was terrible. And I said, I want to meet the catapulter. And the man came over along with four of his assistants. And I said, what's better? Electric catapult or steam? He's been there for 25 years. He said, steam is better. We can fix it with a hammer and a blowtorch. When the electric goes bad, I have to send the MIT to get geniuses over here. I said, steam is better. Yes, sir. It's better. So why did they do electric? Because you can have the catapult go like this. But you can't put planes on it, sir. It takes you 39 seconds. By the time the 39 seconds is up, you have a full-head of steam. And I love breathing that steam, sir. That's that cleanest air you've ever seen. But I said, so you're saying we spent billions of dollars extra to build electric catapults instead of using. And I said, well, I'll still hear you. He said, the elevators are no good, sir. They lifted up by magnets. So here's my deal. I said, when Caterpillar tractor-- and I watched more tractors than any human being in a rip-erock or right through a rock-- it's all hydraulic. So I said, when Caterpillar goes into the business of using magnets to lift up their little blades, when they go away from hydraulic, I'll tell you what. I'm going to do something. I'm going to start using magnets, but we don't want to use them. So we're not letting any Pete. We're not letting any more ships be built with the ridiculous-- billions of dollars more they spent on electric catapults and they're not good. They're not nearly as good. Too complex. And by the way, we had to call the ship in twice because the catapults didn't work. And I predicted that was true. And the same thing with the magnetic elevators. We want them to be made hydraulic, which it can be hit by. Lightening, it can be hit by anything. When a little water touches the magnets, it doesn't work anymore. You're in the Atlantic Ocean with waves at a 60-feet high and the Pacific Ocean with waves at a 70-feet high. And they're talking about magnets. It makes you want to get sick. I actually called in the architect of the ship. And I said, have you designed a ship before? Well, I haven't spent a lot of time on that, sir. I don't know. Even the cab. You know, the tower, the habit in the back, instead of in the middle. It's supposed to be in the middle where you have more room. I said, why do you move there? Well, we thought it was very good. Why did you do it? And why is the ammunition under the-- where the Admiral is, the tower? They have the tower, and they have the ammunition under the tower. I say, if I'm the enemy, I know where I'm aiming. These people, and the thing goes like $20 billion is ridiculous, sir. So we're changing all of that right, Peter. You'll be fired so fast, have you done that? No, but a lot of this is common-sense stuff, really. I mean, I hope I'm not born anybody, but it's all common-sense. This isn't exactly part of my speech, but I got to tell you. You know, I'm getting it all out now, and all the anger I have when I hear about electric catapults that don't work. Crazy.”
4:01

Everyone should read this because it is a microcosm of why everything has gone to shit. This is how his malignant narcissism destroys everything he touches. “We built an aircraft carrier for $19 billion, which is crazy. The price is crazy. It started off at-- I came in one of the first things I want to see. It was the Ford aircraft carrier. It was way over budget. And it had things on it that you didn't need. Like it had magnet. It magnets to lift up the elevators with 10 and 12 planes on them. Think of it. It had all sorts of modern day things that were all instead of using steam for the catapult. They used electric. Let's have an electric catapult. And so what I went to the ship, because I came into office and the ship was way over budget. Built a new produce, unfortunately. It was way over budget. It was going to cost $3 billion. It was up to like $18, $19. It was terrible. And I said, I want to meet the catapulter. And the man came over along with four of his assistants. And I said, what's better? Electric catapult or steam? He's been there for 25 years. He said, steam is better. We can fix it with a hammer and a blowtorch. When the electric goes bad, I have to send the MIT to get geniuses over here. I said, steam is better. Yes, sir. It's better. So why did they do electric? Because you can have the catapult go like this. But you can't put planes on it, sir. It takes you 39 seconds. By the time the 39 seconds is up, you have a full-head of steam. And I love breathing that steam, sir. That's that cleanest air you've ever seen. But I said, so you're saying we spent billions of dollars extra to build electric catapults instead of using. And I said, well, I'll still hear you. He said, the elevators are no good, sir. They lifted up by magnets. So here's my deal. I said, when Caterpillar tractor-- and I watched more tractors than any human being in a rip-erock or right through a rock-- it's all hydraulic. So I said, when Caterpillar goes into the business of using magnets to lift up their little blades, when they go away from hydraulic, I'll tell you what. I'm going to do something. I'm going to start using magnets, but we don't want to use them. So we're not letting any Pete. We're not letting any more ships be built with the ridiculous-- billions of dollars more they spent on electric catapults and they're not good. They're not nearly as good. Too complex. And by the way, we had to call the ship in twice because the catapults didn't work. And I predicted that was true. And the same thing with the magnetic elevators. We want them to be made hydraulic, which it can be hit by. Lightening, it can be hit by anything. When a little water touches the magnets, it doesn't work anymore. You're in the Atlantic Ocean with waves at a 60-feet high and the Pacific Ocean with waves at a 70-feet high. And they're talking about magnets. It makes you want to get sick. I actually called in the architect of the ship. And I said, have you designed a ship before? Well, I haven't spent a lot of time on that, sir. I don't know. Even the cab. You know, the tower, the habit in the back, instead of in the middle. It's supposed to be in the middle where you have more room. I said, why do you move there? Well, we thought it was very good. Why did you do it? And why is the ammunition under the-- where the Admiral is, the tower? They have the tower, and they have the ammunition under the tower. I say, if I'm the enemy, I know where I'm aiming. These people, and the thing goes like $20 billion is ridiculous, sir. So we're changing all of that right, Peter. You'll be fired so fast, have you done that? No, but a lot of this is common-sense stuff, really. I mean, I hope I'm not born anybody, but it's all common-sense. This isn't exactly part of my speech, but I got to tell you. You know, I'm getting it all out now, and all the anger I have when I hear about electric catapults that don't work. Crazy.”

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

395,965 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

The secluded little village of Wycoller nestles in a narrow valley 1½ miles to east of Trawden, Lancashire, England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 It is well-known for its three ancient bridges which have stood over beck for hundreds, if not thousands of years. They have even outlived Wycoller Hall which stands ruined and desolate. But each of the bridges has its very own tale to tell. There are actually seven bridges in village but pack-horse, clapper and clam bridges are of historic interest because of their great ages. The famous pack-horse bridge is a two-arched structure spanning Wycoller beck. It is sometimes called Sally’s Bridge after one of Cunliffe family who lived in hall opposite the bridge in 18th Century. Historians have argued about its age, but none of them are certain, but it is thought to either date from 13th or 15th Century. Its construction is a bit of an oddity, in that the arches are not equal to each other and the structure’s base-stone boulders are not level, giving bridge a somewhat precarious appearance because of that – author John Bentley in his fascinating book ‘Portrait of Wycoller’, alludes to this. Coping stones along sides of bridge are significant in that some of them have faint cup-marks in them, indicating that they were brought down from a prehistoric site on moors above Wycoller and used in bridge’s construction. When walking over bridge ‘you need’ to take care owing to the smoothness of paving slabs which have endured hundreds of years of use. Clapper bridge, sometimes called Druids’ Bridge, Weavers’ Bridge or Hall Bridge, is just a short distance along beck. This is a primitive structure but of massive proportions consisting of three flat gritstone slabs resting on two stone piers, one being a round-shaped boulder, other a thinner pillar-shaped stone that looks quite fragile, but it is in fact very strong. It was originally a two-slab bridge sup-ported on one central pier. However, bridge has succumbed to floods over years and has had to be reconstructed a few times. Its three slabs are heavily worn by hundreds of years of use. There is a legend that says this bridge led to a grove where druids practiced their strange rituals; there is no sign of this mystical grove or amphitheatre today and handloom weavers of Wycoller have long since hung up their clogs. Clapper bridge is thought to date from 16th-17th Century, though a few historians ‘think’ it might date from before Norman conquest (Bentley, John, 1993). Third bridge, clam bridge, located ¼ of a mile along track that runs beside beck in Wycoller Dene. This ancient bridge is formed by one single gritstone slab which is some 12ft long. It rests at one end on bank, while on other side it is propped up on some large stones, but it is very secure even though it might look like it is about to fall into beck. At one time there was a wooden safety rail at one side and holes for this can still be seen. Clam bridge is ‘often’ said to date from Bronze or Iron Age and to have originally stoop up-right on moors to north east (as standing stone – menhir), but there again it probably only dates from 15th or 16th Century. Long slender slab is well-worn and great care should be taken when crossing it. In floods of 1989-90 clam bridge was brought crashing down. It has sometimes been mistaken for a tree trunk lying across beck and at a distance it does indeed look like that. Author John Dixon in his work ‘Historic Walks Around The Pendle Way’, came to conclusion that three Wycoller bridges were of ‘a mid-16th Century’ date. He adds that: “The majority of bridge building was undertaken after Dissolution of monasteries when a moderate number of masons became unemployed and were wandering countryside finding work on many of new bridges which were required as roads became busier and wooden bridges and fords became inadequate.” 🎥 : 'Pack Horse Bridge', in Lancashire 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 (🎥© Europe Attractions) #archaeohistories
0:21

The secluded little village of Wycoller nestles in a narrow valley 1½ miles to east of Trawden, Lancashire, England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 It is well-known for its three ancient bridges which have stood over beck for hundreds, if not thousands of years. They have even outlived Wycoller Hall which stands ruined and desolate. But each of the bridges has its very own tale to tell. There are actually seven bridges in village but pack-horse, clapper and clam bridges are of historic interest because of their great ages. The famous pack-horse bridge is a two-arched structure spanning Wycoller beck. It is sometimes called Sally’s Bridge after one of Cunliffe family who lived in hall opposite the bridge in 18th Century. Historians have argued about its age, but none of them are certain, but it is thought to either date from 13th or 15th Century. Its construction is a bit of an oddity, in that the arches are not equal to each other and the structure’s base-stone boulders are not level, giving bridge a somewhat precarious appearance because of that – author John Bentley in his fascinating book ‘Portrait of Wycoller’, alludes to this. Coping stones along sides of bridge are significant in that some of them have faint cup-marks in them, indicating that they were brought down from a prehistoric site on moors above Wycoller and used in bridge’s construction. When walking over bridge ‘you need’ to take care owing to the smoothness of paving slabs which have endured hundreds of years of use. Clapper bridge, sometimes called Druids’ Bridge, Weavers’ Bridge or Hall Bridge, is just a short distance along beck. This is a primitive structure but of massive proportions consisting of three flat gritstone slabs resting on two stone piers, one being a round-shaped boulder, other a thinner pillar-shaped stone that looks quite fragile, but it is in fact very strong. It was originally a two-slab bridge sup-ported on one central pier. However, bridge has succumbed to floods over years and has had to be reconstructed a few times. Its three slabs are heavily worn by hundreds of years of use. There is a legend that says this bridge led to a grove where druids practiced their strange rituals; there is no sign of this mystical grove or amphitheatre today and handloom weavers of Wycoller have long since hung up their clogs. Clapper bridge is thought to date from 16th-17th Century, though a few historians ‘think’ it might date from before Norman conquest (Bentley, John, 1993). Third bridge, clam bridge, located ¼ of a mile along track that runs beside beck in Wycoller Dene. This ancient bridge is formed by one single gritstone slab which is some 12ft long. It rests at one end on bank, while on other side it is propped up on some large stones, but it is very secure even though it might look like it is about to fall into beck. At one time there was a wooden safety rail at one side and holes for this can still be seen. Clam bridge is ‘often’ said to date from Bronze or Iron Age and to have originally stoop up-right on moors to north east (as standing stone – menhir), but there again it probably only dates from 15th or 16th Century. Long slender slab is well-worn and great care should be taken when crossing it. In floods of 1989-90 clam bridge was brought crashing down. It has sometimes been mistaken for a tree trunk lying across beck and at a distance it does indeed look like that. Author John Dixon in his work ‘Historic Walks Around The Pendle Way’, came to conclusion that three Wycoller bridges were of ‘a mid-16th Century’ date. He adds that: “The majority of bridge building was undertaken after Dissolution of monasteries when a moderate number of masons became unemployed and were wandering countryside finding work on many of new bridges which were required as roads became busier and wooden bridges and fords became inadequate.” 🎥 : 'Pack Horse Bridge', in Lancashire 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 (🎥© Europe Attractions) #archaeohistories

Archaeo - Histories

63,556 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

In all my years of broadcasting, I'd never gotten emotional on air until tonight. It was impossible to hold back the tears. Jack Piccione of Tappan Zee lost his father suddenly last Sept. 1. Matthew Piccione died of a heart attack minutes after playing pickleball with friends. He was 51. Over the last three years, I got to know Matthew Piccione fairly well. One day back in 2023, he asked coach George Gaine for my number so he could call me just to say thank you for calling out Jack's contributions during Tappan Zee's championship run. Jack was a role player who averaged maybe 5 points a game as a freshman. But he started and never came off the court. "I know he doesn't score a lot of points," Matthew Piccione said. "But you are one of the only people who appreciates what he does for the team." Matthew Piccione kept a very low profile at games and reinforced in his son to be the emodiment of all the things that make Tappan Zee basketball different than any other program in the state. Play unselfish. Defend. Be coachable. Defend. Draw charges. Pass. Sacrifice for your teammates. And, of course, defend some more. Nobody in the history of Tappan Zee basketball since I have been covering has ever played that role better than Jack Piccione. He's the best best defensive player in the program and is on an elite level of players I've been around in Section 1. When Matthew died in September, I worried about Jack. I wondered what his senior season might be like. The person most responsible for instilling and reinforcing the values that made Jack great was now tragically gone. Tonight, Jack Piccione scored 5 points in the Section 1 Championship game. FIVE. Yet not only did his team because of his performance, I had the honor of handing him the MVP Trophy to prove it. In the final 90 seconds of the game, I shared the story of Matthew Piccione and his passing. You will hear the emotion in my voice. It's genuine, not because of any relationship I had with him. You just can't be a sports parent and not relate to loving your child and always wanting what's best for them. Because here's what I am going to tell you. And I really want all parents to read this and remember it: Your kids' youth - not just athletics, but all of it - is short and it's precious. You don't get this time back when it's over. It goes way too quick. And some don't even get to see it to the end. You have a choice: You can spend this period of their lives stressing about how many points they score, what awards or accolades they receive, begging people to vote in the online poll for Player of the Week, emailing the coach and complaining about playing time or lamenting the number of shots they get in a game. Go ahead. You can make all of that important for yourself and your child. Trust me, you won't be alone in doing so. Or you can do what Matthew Piccione did. Sit in the stands and enjoy watching your children compete. Teach them that it's team above all else, stress what it means to sacrifice and ensure them that, when you do those things and have success, the feeling of hanging a banner will far exceed any of the personal accolades think are important. And, sadly, God might choose that you won't be around to see it all anyway. Matthew didn't get to give his son a hug after he won tonight. And Jack didn't get to see the pride in his father's face. Think about that. If you are a parent, try to put your child in Jack's shoes. If God forbid your child was confronted with the same tragedy, you'd want them looking back on this sacred period of their lives the way Jack will forever recall them with his dad. Tonight was complete validation for Jack Piccione and all of the things his father always told him. Jack scored 5 points and won the MVP on his way to becoming the most decorated basketball player in Tappan Zee history. Nobody has ever won more in a TZ uniform than the most unselfish player they've ever had. He wouldn't trade his career with anyone, either. Take a moment to listen to myself and Pleasantville coach Nick Bonura from tonight's SportsEngine Play broadcast of DutchmenAthletics TZ Boys Basketball
2:26

In all my years of broadcasting, I'd never gotten emotional on air until tonight. It was impossible to hold back the tears. Jack Piccione of Tappan Zee lost his father suddenly last Sept. 1. Matthew Piccione died of a heart attack minutes after playing pickleball with friends. He was 51. Over the last three years, I got to know Matthew Piccione fairly well. One day back in 2023, he asked coach George Gaine for my number so he could call me just to say thank you for calling out Jack's contributions during Tappan Zee's championship run. Jack was a role player who averaged maybe 5 points a game as a freshman. But he started and never came off the court. "I know he doesn't score a lot of points," Matthew Piccione said. "But you are one of the only people who appreciates what he does for the team." Matthew Piccione kept a very low profile at games and reinforced in his son to be the emodiment of all the things that make Tappan Zee basketball different than any other program in the state. Play unselfish. Defend. Be coachable. Defend. Draw charges. Pass. Sacrifice for your teammates. And, of course, defend some more. Nobody in the history of Tappan Zee basketball since I have been covering has ever played that role better than Jack Piccione. He's the best best defensive player in the program and is on an elite level of players I've been around in Section 1. When Matthew died in September, I worried about Jack. I wondered what his senior season might be like. The person most responsible for instilling and reinforcing the values that made Jack great was now tragically gone. Tonight, Jack Piccione scored 5 points in the Section 1 Championship game. FIVE. Yet not only did his team because of his performance, I had the honor of handing him the MVP Trophy to prove it. In the final 90 seconds of the game, I shared the story of Matthew Piccione and his passing. You will hear the emotion in my voice. It's genuine, not because of any relationship I had with him. You just can't be a sports parent and not relate to loving your child and always wanting what's best for them. Because here's what I am going to tell you. And I really want all parents to read this and remember it: Your kids' youth - not just athletics, but all of it - is short and it's precious. You don't get this time back when it's over. It goes way too quick. And some don't even get to see it to the end. You have a choice: You can spend this period of their lives stressing about how many points they score, what awards or accolades they receive, begging people to vote in the online poll for Player of the Week, emailing the coach and complaining about playing time or lamenting the number of shots they get in a game. Go ahead. You can make all of that important for yourself and your child. Trust me, you won't be alone in doing so. Or you can do what Matthew Piccione did. Sit in the stands and enjoy watching your children compete. Teach them that it's team above all else, stress what it means to sacrifice and ensure them that, when you do those things and have success, the feeling of hanging a banner will far exceed any of the personal accolades think are important. And, sadly, God might choose that you won't be around to see it all anyway. Matthew didn't get to give his son a hug after he won tonight. And Jack didn't get to see the pride in his father's face. Think about that. If you are a parent, try to put your child in Jack's shoes. If God forbid your child was confronted with the same tragedy, you'd want them looking back on this sacred period of their lives the way Jack will forever recall them with his dad. Tonight was complete validation for Jack Piccione and all of the things his father always told him. Jack scored 5 points and won the MVP on his way to becoming the most decorated basketball player in Tappan Zee history. Nobody has ever won more in a TZ uniform than the most unselfish player they've ever had. He wouldn't trade his career with anyone, either. Take a moment to listen to myself and Pleasantville coach Nick Bonura from tonight's SportsEngine Play broadcast of DutchmenAthletics TZ Boys Basketball

Kevin Devaney Jr.

191,709 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Steve Jobs on how to build a great brand After re-joining Apple in 1996, Steve Jobs announced the “Think different” campaign with the following statement: “To me, marketing is about values. This is a very complicated and noisy world. We’re not going to get a chance to get people to remember much about us. No company is. So we have to be really clear on what we want them to know about us.” He cites Nike as one of the greatest jobs of marketing the universe has ever seen: “Remember, Nike sells a commodity—they sell shoes! And yet when you think of Nike, you feel something different than a shoe company. In their ads, they don’t ever talk about the product. They don’t ever tell you about their air soles and why they are better than Reebok’s air soles. What does Nike do in their advertising? They honor great athletes, and they honor great athletics. That’s who they are, that’s what they are about.” Marketing guru Seth Godin also used Nike as an example of great branding in a blog post a few years ago: “If Nike announced that they were opening a hotel, you’d have a pretty good guess about what it would be like. But if Hyatt announced that they were going to start making shoes, you would have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER what those shoes would be like. That’s because Nike owns a brand and Hyatt simply owns real estate.” Jobs goes on to explain how the Apple team arrived at the “Think Different” campaign: “Our customers want to know who is Apple and what is it that we stand for. Where do we fit in this world? What we’re about isn’t making boxes for people to get their jobs done—although we do that well. We do that better than almost anybody, in some cases. But Apple is about something more than that. Apple at the core—its core value—is that we believe people with passion can change the world for the better… And that those people who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world are the ones who actually do.” He continues: “And so, what we’re going to do in our first brand marketing campaign in several years is to get back to that core value. A lot of things have changed. The market is in a totally different place than it was a decade ago, and Apple is totally different… the products and the distribution strategy and the manufacturing are totally different. And we understand that. But values and core values—those things shouldn’t change. The things that Apple believed in, at its core, are the same things that Apple really stands for today.” Apple’s “Think Different” campaign was designed to honor those people who have changed the world. And as Jobs so eloquently put it: “Some of them are living. Some of them are not. But the ones that aren’t, you’ll know that if they ever used a computer, it would’ve been a Mac. The theme of the campaign is ‘Think Different.’ It’s honoring the people who think different and who move this world forward. And it is what we are about. It touches the soul of this company.” If you’re looking to create a great brand, I’d start out by asking: what are your core values and what does your company honor?
6:48

Steve Jobs on how to build a great brand After re-joining Apple in 1996, Steve Jobs announced the “Think different” campaign with the following statement: “To me, marketing is about values. This is a very complicated and noisy world. We’re not going to get a chance to get people to remember much about us. No company is. So we have to be really clear on what we want them to know about us.” He cites Nike as one of the greatest jobs of marketing the universe has ever seen: “Remember, Nike sells a commodity—they sell shoes! And yet when you think of Nike, you feel something different than a shoe company. In their ads, they don’t ever talk about the product. They don’t ever tell you about their air soles and why they are better than Reebok’s air soles. What does Nike do in their advertising? They honor great athletes, and they honor great athletics. That’s who they are, that’s what they are about.” Marketing guru Seth Godin also used Nike as an example of great branding in a blog post a few years ago: “If Nike announced that they were opening a hotel, you’d have a pretty good guess about what it would be like. But if Hyatt announced that they were going to start making shoes, you would have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER what those shoes would be like. That’s because Nike owns a brand and Hyatt simply owns real estate.” Jobs goes on to explain how the Apple team arrived at the “Think Different” campaign: “Our customers want to know who is Apple and what is it that we stand for. Where do we fit in this world? What we’re about isn’t making boxes for people to get their jobs done—although we do that well. We do that better than almost anybody, in some cases. But Apple is about something more than that. Apple at the core—its core value—is that we believe people with passion can change the world for the better… And that those people who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world are the ones who actually do.” He continues: “And so, what we’re going to do in our first brand marketing campaign in several years is to get back to that core value. A lot of things have changed. The market is in a totally different place than it was a decade ago, and Apple is totally different… the products and the distribution strategy and the manufacturing are totally different. And we understand that. But values and core values—those things shouldn’t change. The things that Apple believed in, at its core, are the same things that Apple really stands for today.” Apple’s “Think Different” campaign was designed to honor those people who have changed the world. And as Jobs so eloquently put it: “Some of them are living. Some of them are not. But the ones that aren’t, you’ll know that if they ever used a computer, it would’ve been a Mac. The theme of the campaign is ‘Think Different.’ It’s honoring the people who think different and who move this world forward. And it is what we are about. It touches the soul of this company.” If you’re looking to create a great brand, I’d start out by asking: what are your core values and what does your company honor?

Startup Archive

338,105 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Jordan Peterson: "The most dangerous person is one who is articulate" "Articulate is an interesting word. If your joints are articulated, that means you can do things with them because they're not one solid vague mass. They're differentiated. Someone who's graceful is compelling because they're articulated. And speech is a form of articulation in that manner." Peterson explains why this matters: "It is definitely the case that there is no more exceptional form of the capacity to be dangerous than to be articulate. And one of the things that really shocks me is that young men in particular are never taught this." He makes the case bluntly: "Do you want to be competent and dangerous, or do you want to be vague and useless? Because those are your options. And I don't care what your job is. If you're a plumber, and I have great respect for plumbers, and you're articulate: you can negotiate with your clients, introduce your co-workers, make a case for your employees, advertise your services, think through your problems. You're firing on all cylinders." Peterson shares a deeper truth: "Our whole culture is based on the idea of the supremacy of the word. The idea that it is the word itself that extracts habitable order from chaos and possibility. And the reason our culture is predicated on that is because it's a deep truth." He gives an example from the military: "I know a former special operations soldier, Jocko Willink. He's about four feet wide and three feet thick. One tough son of a bitch. You don't want to mess with him. And he knows perfectly well, and is very capable of articulating, that his success as an eminent warrior is in no small part dependent on his ability to communicate." Peterson explains why: "Because he could communicate well, he could listen to the men under his command. Because he was articulate, he could explain to his superiors the situation on the ground. Because he was articulate, he could make a case that the men under his command who were deserving would be promoted. Because he could think in an articulate manner, he could plan strategically and not lose battles." He asks the hard question: "What's the alternative? You want to be inarticulate? You want to say 'uh' and 'like' and 'um' and pause and stumble? Be unable to formulate a strategy? Be unable to elucidate a vision? Be unable to compel and convince other people to entice them with your articulated vision of what might be? You would choose awkwardness over grace. It's preposterous. It's beyond foolish." How do you become articulate? Peterson offers a metaphor: "Imagine you're trying to walk across a swamp. The swamp is murky, but you know there's a path of stone under the water, and it twists and moves. If you stay on the path, you won't drown. The crocodiles won't devour you. As you walk forward, you feel with your next step where the stone might be. Then you feel it solid. Then you take that step. You search and find out what's solid, and you move forward in that manner." He applies this to speech: "That's what you do with your words. You feel, is this the right word? Is the fact that I'm uttering it putting me together and making me intact and stronger? Or is it tearing me apart and making me dissolute and weak? You can learn to do that." Peterson shares what he noticed 40 years ago: "Much of what I said actually made me feel weak. I didn't know why exactly. But sometimes some of the things I said didn't have that effect. They weren't accompanied by a sense of shame. They weren't accompanied by a sense of vulnerability. They were solid. At the beginning, that was probably only about 5% of what I said. The rest of it was instrumental — language I was using to get my way. There was an arrogance in my use of language that had to do with the desire to attain proximal victories. To appear smart. To win an argument." He contrasts that with real articulation: "A very different idea than merely feeling my way along to see what word was appropriate for what moment. But you can learn to do that. You can listen to yourself. You can stop humming and hawing and using 'like' and 'you know' and fillers. You can take the time necessary to craft your words carefully. You can practice merely saying what you believe to be true. You can read great writers. You can write about the problems that obsess you. And you can become articulate as a consequence." The power of the pause: "When you're in a discussion with someone, they might present you with a question or a conundrum. Instead of responding with what you 'know' to be right, you could just ask yourself: what do I actually think about that? But it has to be a real question. It has to be the kind of question you pose to someone you didn't know. It has to be a question predicated on the idea that you might not know who you are, and that you could ask." Peterson continues: "Someone presents you with a question. You think: okay, what do I think about that? But you have to want to know the answer. And then the answer will make itself known because that's how thought works. And then you can just communicate that answer." He explains what happens next: "If you do that, you'll be interesting right away. You'll be interesting to the person you're talking to. And if they do that to you, they'll be interesting too. And then if you both do that, you'll have an interesting conversation. And if you have an interesting conversation, you'll both grow as a consequence. That's actually the pathway to growth." Peterson uses Joe Rogan as an example: "One of the reasons Joe Rogan is so successful is that that's what Joe does. He just asks questions. He isn't trying to get something from his guests. He's not trying to become more famous. He doesn't need any more money. There's no instrumental utilization of language in his discourse. He's just a humble lunkhead in the most profound sense who would like to know more than he knows, and who asks all the stupid questions he can think up." He continues: "It turns out he's actually very smart and very well educated now, after talking to hundreds of people and listening. The stupid questions he asks aren't stupid. They're questions shared by virtually everyone who's listening. He takes his listeners along on this process of exploratory endeavor. And it's the pathway to success." Peterson closes with this: "The same thing can be true of your life. If you're guided by the spirit of honest inquiry and every word you say is reflective of what you believe to be the truth, then the pathway that you walk on is a golden pathway to success. I know that to be true."
14:21

Jordan Peterson: "The most dangerous person is one who is articulate" "Articulate is an interesting word. If your joints are articulated, that means you can do things with them because they're not one solid vague mass. They're differentiated. Someone who's graceful is compelling because they're articulated. And speech is a form of articulation in that manner." Peterson explains why this matters: "It is definitely the case that there is no more exceptional form of the capacity to be dangerous than to be articulate. And one of the things that really shocks me is that young men in particular are never taught this." He makes the case bluntly: "Do you want to be competent and dangerous, or do you want to be vague and useless? Because those are your options. And I don't care what your job is. If you're a plumber, and I have great respect for plumbers, and you're articulate: you can negotiate with your clients, introduce your co-workers, make a case for your employees, advertise your services, think through your problems. You're firing on all cylinders." Peterson shares a deeper truth: "Our whole culture is based on the idea of the supremacy of the word. The idea that it is the word itself that extracts habitable order from chaos and possibility. And the reason our culture is predicated on that is because it's a deep truth." He gives an example from the military: "I know a former special operations soldier, Jocko Willink. He's about four feet wide and three feet thick. One tough son of a bitch. You don't want to mess with him. And he knows perfectly well, and is very capable of articulating, that his success as an eminent warrior is in no small part dependent on his ability to communicate." Peterson explains why: "Because he could communicate well, he could listen to the men under his command. Because he was articulate, he could explain to his superiors the situation on the ground. Because he was articulate, he could make a case that the men under his command who were deserving would be promoted. Because he could think in an articulate manner, he could plan strategically and not lose battles." He asks the hard question: "What's the alternative? You want to be inarticulate? You want to say 'uh' and 'like' and 'um' and pause and stumble? Be unable to formulate a strategy? Be unable to elucidate a vision? Be unable to compel and convince other people to entice them with your articulated vision of what might be? You would choose awkwardness over grace. It's preposterous. It's beyond foolish." How do you become articulate? Peterson offers a metaphor: "Imagine you're trying to walk across a swamp. The swamp is murky, but you know there's a path of stone under the water, and it twists and moves. If you stay on the path, you won't drown. The crocodiles won't devour you. As you walk forward, you feel with your next step where the stone might be. Then you feel it solid. Then you take that step. You search and find out what's solid, and you move forward in that manner." He applies this to speech: "That's what you do with your words. You feel, is this the right word? Is the fact that I'm uttering it putting me together and making me intact and stronger? Or is it tearing me apart and making me dissolute and weak? You can learn to do that." Peterson shares what he noticed 40 years ago: "Much of what I said actually made me feel weak. I didn't know why exactly. But sometimes some of the things I said didn't have that effect. They weren't accompanied by a sense of shame. They weren't accompanied by a sense of vulnerability. They were solid. At the beginning, that was probably only about 5% of what I said. The rest of it was instrumental — language I was using to get my way. There was an arrogance in my use of language that had to do with the desire to attain proximal victories. To appear smart. To win an argument." He contrasts that with real articulation: "A very different idea than merely feeling my way along to see what word was appropriate for what moment. But you can learn to do that. You can listen to yourself. You can stop humming and hawing and using 'like' and 'you know' and fillers. You can take the time necessary to craft your words carefully. You can practice merely saying what you believe to be true. You can read great writers. You can write about the problems that obsess you. And you can become articulate as a consequence." The power of the pause: "When you're in a discussion with someone, they might present you with a question or a conundrum. Instead of responding with what you 'know' to be right, you could just ask yourself: what do I actually think about that? But it has to be a real question. It has to be the kind of question you pose to someone you didn't know. It has to be a question predicated on the idea that you might not know who you are, and that you could ask." Peterson continues: "Someone presents you with a question. You think: okay, what do I think about that? But you have to want to know the answer. And then the answer will make itself known because that's how thought works. And then you can just communicate that answer." He explains what happens next: "If you do that, you'll be interesting right away. You'll be interesting to the person you're talking to. And if they do that to you, they'll be interesting too. And then if you both do that, you'll have an interesting conversation. And if you have an interesting conversation, you'll both grow as a consequence. That's actually the pathway to growth." Peterson uses Joe Rogan as an example: "One of the reasons Joe Rogan is so successful is that that's what Joe does. He just asks questions. He isn't trying to get something from his guests. He's not trying to become more famous. He doesn't need any more money. There's no instrumental utilization of language in his discourse. He's just a humble lunkhead in the most profound sense who would like to know more than he knows, and who asks all the stupid questions he can think up." He continues: "It turns out he's actually very smart and very well educated now, after talking to hundreds of people and listening. The stupid questions he asks aren't stupid. They're questions shared by virtually everyone who's listening. He takes his listeners along on this process of exploratory endeavor. And it's the pathway to success." Peterson closes with this: "The same thing can be true of your life. If you're guided by the spirit of honest inquiry and every word you say is reflective of what you believe to be the truth, then the pathway that you walk on is a golden pathway to success. I know that to be true."

Jaynit

121,934 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten