Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

WHO CALLED THE CODE RED! This “Deployment Company” from OpenAI is not a masterstroke. It is a quiet admission that the economics are cracking. They are putting up $1.5 billion of their own capital into a $10 billion joint venture, promising private equity backers a guaranteed 17.5% annual return...

BrianRoemmele's profile picture

Brian Roemmele

482,561 subscribers

29,173 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политикаНаука и технологии
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Aravind Srinivas just described a future most founders are pretending they are ready for. One person. One machine. A company that runs itself. Srinivas: “Buy a Mac mini, set up a Perplexity personal computer, and run their business on that.” Not a side project. Not a pitch deck. A real business with real revenue while the founder is not in the building. AI runs the ads. Handles SEO. Integrates Stripe. Ships features. Answers customers. All of it executing without a single employee. Srinivas: “Have this all working while you can be sipping wine in Napa.” But before he sold the dream he killed the one most people are already chasing. Srinivas: “Everybody talks about this one-person one-billion-dollar company. It’s not truly moving the GDP by one billion. It’s not truly creating new value.” One researcher collecting a billion in equity does not grow an economy. It rearranges numbers between balance sheets. Nothing gets built. No customer gets served. That is not value creation. That is valuation creation. Srinivas wants no part of it. What he described is the opposite. The person driving Uber between shifts who has the idea but not the payroll. Not the engineering. Not the marketing. Not the support staff. That person gets a machine that replaces all of it. Hundreds of thousands in revenue. Millions. Generated by autonomous systems doing the work that used to require ten employees and a burn rate. Not paper wealth. Not valuation theater. Output that moves through an economy and touches real customers. That is what moves GDP. Not one person worth a billion dollars. A million people each building something worth a million. That math rewrites a country. Then Srinivas said the part that separates him from every hype merchant in the room. Srinivas: “Everybody thinks AI is already there. It’s not there yet. Someone has to do that hard work.” The vision is real. The infrastructure is not. The agents are not autonomous. The integrations are not seamless. The plumbing is not finished. Someone has to wire the APIs. Connect the billing. Build the bridge between what a founder wants and what a machine can deliver. That work is not a keynote. It is not a tweet thread. It is engineering that nobody wants to do and everybody will depend on. Whoever finishes it first does not just build a product. They hand every ambitious person on Earth a company they can run alone. The corporations that need five hundred people to do what one founder with the right infrastructure could do are not efficient. They are exposed. And the person building the thing that exposes them just told you exactly what it looks like. He also told you it is not going to build itself.
1:13

Aravind Srinivas just described a future most founders are pretending they are ready for. One person. One machine. A company that runs itself. Srinivas: “Buy a Mac mini, set up a Perplexity personal computer, and run their business on that.” Not a side project. Not a pitch deck. A real business with real revenue while the founder is not in the building. AI runs the ads. Handles SEO. Integrates Stripe. Ships features. Answers customers. All of it executing without a single employee. Srinivas: “Have this all working while you can be sipping wine in Napa.” But before he sold the dream he killed the one most people are already chasing. Srinivas: “Everybody talks about this one-person one-billion-dollar company. It’s not truly moving the GDP by one billion. It’s not truly creating new value.” One researcher collecting a billion in equity does not grow an economy. It rearranges numbers between balance sheets. Nothing gets built. No customer gets served. That is not value creation. That is valuation creation. Srinivas wants no part of it. What he described is the opposite. The person driving Uber between shifts who has the idea but not the payroll. Not the engineering. Not the marketing. Not the support staff. That person gets a machine that replaces all of it. Hundreds of thousands in revenue. Millions. Generated by autonomous systems doing the work that used to require ten employees and a burn rate. Not paper wealth. Not valuation theater. Output that moves through an economy and touches real customers. That is what moves GDP. Not one person worth a billion dollars. A million people each building something worth a million. That math rewrites a country. Then Srinivas said the part that separates him from every hype merchant in the room. Srinivas: “Everybody thinks AI is already there. It’s not there yet. Someone has to do that hard work.” The vision is real. The infrastructure is not. The agents are not autonomous. The integrations are not seamless. The plumbing is not finished. Someone has to wire the APIs. Connect the billing. Build the bridge between what a founder wants and what a machine can deliver. That work is not a keynote. It is not a tweet thread. It is engineering that nobody wants to do and everybody will depend on. Whoever finishes it first does not just build a product. They hand every ambitious person on Earth a company they can run alone. The corporations that need five hundred people to do what one founder with the right infrastructure could do are not efficient. They are exposed. And the person building the thing that exposes them just told you exactly what it looks like. He also told you it is not going to build itself.

Dustin

64,593 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Jensen Huang just explained why every company cutting engineers over AI is asking the entirely wrong question. Huang: “People say, I don’t need software engineers because apparently coding is going to be automated.” That was the narrative. Here is what Huang actually did. Huang: “I’ve given AIs to every one of my software engineers and hardware engineers and engineers period. 100% of NVIDIA has AI assistants, AI coders, and they’re busier than ever.” Not fewer engineers. Not smaller teams. Busier than ever. That is the line most companies are getting completely wrong right now. They hear “AI can write code” and immediately start cutting headcount. Huang did the opposite. He armed everyone. Huang: “And so the question is, what is the task versus what is the job? No different than a financial analyst; the task is mess around with spreadsheets, but the job is to make financial advice. The job is to help a customer.” Writing code was always the task. It was never the job. The job is architecture. Knowing what to build. Why it matters. How it fits into a system that actually creates value. Code is the execution layer between the idea and the outcome. Nothing more. When you automate that layer, you don’t eliminate the engineer. You eliminate the bottleneck between what they can envision and what they can ship. The companies using AI to cut headcount are optimizing for cost. The companies using AI to multiply output are optimizing for territory. Nvidia chose territory. Every engineer at the most valuable semiconductor company on Earth now operates with an AI assistant. Not a pilot program. Not an experiment. Company-wide. Every function. Every team. And the result is not less work. It is more work. Faster. At a scale that was physically impossible twelve months ago. The companies that understand the difference between eliminating engineers and unleashing them will build what comes next. The ones that don’t will watch their best talent walk out the door to the ones that did.
0:35

Jensen Huang just explained why every company cutting engineers over AI is asking the entirely wrong question. Huang: “People say, I don’t need software engineers because apparently coding is going to be automated.” That was the narrative. Here is what Huang actually did. Huang: “I’ve given AIs to every one of my software engineers and hardware engineers and engineers period. 100% of NVIDIA has AI assistants, AI coders, and they’re busier than ever.” Not fewer engineers. Not smaller teams. Busier than ever. That is the line most companies are getting completely wrong right now. They hear “AI can write code” and immediately start cutting headcount. Huang did the opposite. He armed everyone. Huang: “And so the question is, what is the task versus what is the job? No different than a financial analyst; the task is mess around with spreadsheets, but the job is to make financial advice. The job is to help a customer.” Writing code was always the task. It was never the job. The job is architecture. Knowing what to build. Why it matters. How it fits into a system that actually creates value. Code is the execution layer between the idea and the outcome. Nothing more. When you automate that layer, you don’t eliminate the engineer. You eliminate the bottleneck between what they can envision and what they can ship. The companies using AI to cut headcount are optimizing for cost. The companies using AI to multiply output are optimizing for territory. Nvidia chose territory. Every engineer at the most valuable semiconductor company on Earth now operates with an AI assistant. Not a pilot program. Not an experiment. Company-wide. Every function. Every team. And the result is not less work. It is more work. Faster. At a scale that was physically impossible twelve months ago. The companies that understand the difference between eliminating engineers and unleashing them will build what comes next. The ones that don’t will watch their best talent walk out the door to the ones that did.

Dustin

82,810 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Larry Ellison just told every software engineer on Earth their job description is dead. Not evolving. Dead. Ellison: “The code that Oracle is writing, Oracle isn’t writing. Our AI models are writing.” This is not a startup demo. This is one of the largest infrastructure monopolies on the planet telling you it already replaced the people who built it. For fifty years, building software meant translating human intent into machine instructions. Line by line. Bug by bug. Sprint by sprint. That entire layer is gone. Ellison: “We don’t write the procedure. We declare our intent.” That sentence just made the entire engineering labor market flinch. The procedure was the job. The procedure was the paycheck. The procedure was what made a developer valuable. And now the machine does it without being asked twice. Ellison: “We just tell the model what we want the program to do, and then the AI comes up with a step-by-step process to actually do it.” You are no longer paid to build. You are paid to think. And most organizations have no idea how to evaluate that. The companies still hiring armies of developers to grind through codebases are paying salaries the machine already made worthless. Not in years. In seconds. When a company worth hundreds of billions hands the keyboard to the machine and tells you the output is better, the debate is not winding down. The debate is over. The enterprise that wins this decade does not write the best code. It removes the human from the process entirely and runs on intent alone. The programmers who survive are the ones who realize the craft is no longer typing. It is architecture. It is judgment. It is knowing what to build and why. Everything else now belongs to the machine. And the machine does not negotiate severance.
0:31

Larry Ellison just told every software engineer on Earth their job description is dead. Not evolving. Dead. Ellison: “The code that Oracle is writing, Oracle isn’t writing. Our AI models are writing.” This is not a startup demo. This is one of the largest infrastructure monopolies on the planet telling you it already replaced the people who built it. For fifty years, building software meant translating human intent into machine instructions. Line by line. Bug by bug. Sprint by sprint. That entire layer is gone. Ellison: “We don’t write the procedure. We declare our intent.” That sentence just made the entire engineering labor market flinch. The procedure was the job. The procedure was the paycheck. The procedure was what made a developer valuable. And now the machine does it without being asked twice. Ellison: “We just tell the model what we want the program to do, and then the AI comes up with a step-by-step process to actually do it.” You are no longer paid to build. You are paid to think. And most organizations have no idea how to evaluate that. The companies still hiring armies of developers to grind through codebases are paying salaries the machine already made worthless. Not in years. In seconds. When a company worth hundreds of billions hands the keyboard to the machine and tells you the output is better, the debate is not winding down. The debate is over. The enterprise that wins this decade does not write the best code. It removes the human from the process entirely and runs on intent alone. The programmers who survive are the ones who realize the craft is no longer typing. It is architecture. It is judgment. It is knowing what to build and why. Everything else now belongs to the machine. And the machine does not negotiate severance.

Dustin

536,070 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

For months, everyone called this a liquidity problem. It is not a liquidity problem anymore. It is not just investors pulling money out. It is investors who no longer want in. That is the bigger problem. The whole boom was built on flows. Wealth managers, pensions, insurance, the public. The machine had to keep moving. Now it is reversing. New direct lending issuance fell from 74.6 billion to 44.8 billion in one quarter, per Reuters and PitchBook. A drop of roughly 40%. And the redemptions keep coming. BlackRock's HLend capped requests after investors tried to pull 13%. Up from 9% the quarter before. The run is accelerating. It is not one fund. Blackstone hit its limits. Cliff Water's requests grew. Partners Group capped a private equity fund near 10% of NAV. The pressure is not staying in one lane. Now the public tell. Publicly traded BDCs are not bouncing, even as the market soars. They are the liquid version of the same trade. The bargain hunters are not showing up. That is a buyer strike. And the real fear is the dividends. If you expected 9% and get 4%, why take the risk on the rest? You do not hold the fund hoping Blue Owl turns out right. The stress is spreading. Software loans are down 4.7% this year while the index is up 1.2%. And software sits across both leveraged loans and private credit. Defaults just matched a 2023 high in a 300 billion dollar private credit index. And defaults lag. The amendments, the extensions, the PIK come first. Here is the mechanism. New money slows, old money wants out, so managers protect liquidity. They lend less. Deals slow. Exits disappear. Distributions shrink. Fundraising weakens. The loop closes on itself. It does not need a Lehman blowup to feed on itself. It is not one explosion. It is a system that can no longer clear. The argument from inside is that investors do not know what they are talking about. That this is all nothing. But this many people wanting out, and this many refusing to come in, is not nothing. Private credit can survive bad headlines. Problem loans. Even redemptions. What it cannot survive is a buyer strike, because the whole boom assumed capital would keep arriving. So this is not 2021 anymore. The credit cycle has changed. And the people who asked for their money back were never confused. They were just early.
22:40

For months, everyone called this a liquidity problem. It is not a liquidity problem anymore. It is not just investors pulling money out. It is investors who no longer want in. That is the bigger problem. The whole boom was built on flows. Wealth managers, pensions, insurance, the public. The machine had to keep moving. Now it is reversing. New direct lending issuance fell from 74.6 billion to 44.8 billion in one quarter, per Reuters and PitchBook. A drop of roughly 40%. And the redemptions keep coming. BlackRock's HLend capped requests after investors tried to pull 13%. Up from 9% the quarter before. The run is accelerating. It is not one fund. Blackstone hit its limits. Cliff Water's requests grew. Partners Group capped a private equity fund near 10% of NAV. The pressure is not staying in one lane. Now the public tell. Publicly traded BDCs are not bouncing, even as the market soars. They are the liquid version of the same trade. The bargain hunters are not showing up. That is a buyer strike. And the real fear is the dividends. If you expected 9% and get 4%, why take the risk on the rest? You do not hold the fund hoping Blue Owl turns out right. The stress is spreading. Software loans are down 4.7% this year while the index is up 1.2%. And software sits across both leveraged loans and private credit. Defaults just matched a 2023 high in a 300 billion dollar private credit index. And defaults lag. The amendments, the extensions, the PIK come first. Here is the mechanism. New money slows, old money wants out, so managers protect liquidity. They lend less. Deals slow. Exits disappear. Distributions shrink. Fundraising weakens. The loop closes on itself. It does not need a Lehman blowup to feed on itself. It is not one explosion. It is a system that can no longer clear. The argument from inside is that investors do not know what they are talking about. That this is all nothing. But this many people wanting out, and this many refusing to come in, is not nothing. Private credit can survive bad headlines. Problem loans. Even redemptions. What it cannot survive is a buyer strike, because the whole boom assumed capital would keep arriving. So this is not 2021 anymore. The credit cycle has changed. And the people who asked for their money back were never confused. They were just early.

Jeffrey P. Snider

32,147 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Jensen Huang was asked whether AI's future is open source or proprietary the question the whole industry keeps fighting over. He didn't pick a side. He said something that quietly ends the fight. "models is a technology, not a product. Model is a technology, not a service" "For the vast majority of consumers, the horizontal layer, the general intelligence, I would really, really love not to go fine-tune my own" "all these industries, their domain expertise, their specialization has to be channeled, has to be captured in a way that they can control, and that it can only come from open models" "the open model industry we're contributing tremendously to it is near the frontier" Everyone else is arguing about which lab wins OpenAI or Anthropic, who has the smartest frontier model this quarter. Jensen is standing on stage saying that's the sideshow. The proprietary model is the convenience layer you rent when you don't care. The open model is the thing you own when the work is yours. Two different products for two different needs not two horses in one race. open models are the second-biggest in the room. Ahead of Anthropic. Behind only OpenAI.
2:51

Jensen Huang was asked whether AI's future is open source or proprietary the question the whole industry keeps fighting over. He didn't pick a side. He said something that quietly ends the fight. "models is a technology, not a product. Model is a technology, not a service" "For the vast majority of consumers, the horizontal layer, the general intelligence, I would really, really love not to go fine-tune my own" "all these industries, their domain expertise, their specialization has to be channeled, has to be captured in a way that they can control, and that it can only come from open models" "the open model industry we're contributing tremendously to it is near the frontier" Everyone else is arguing about which lab wins OpenAI or Anthropic, who has the smartest frontier model this quarter. Jensen is standing on stage saying that's the sideshow. The proprietary model is the convenience layer you rent when you don't care. The open model is the thing you own when the work is yours. Two different products for two different needs not two horses in one race. open models are the second-biggest in the room. Ahead of Anthropic. Behind only OpenAI.

Vikram M

12,078 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Sam Altman just handed every startup founder a one-question autopsy. Altman: “If you’re building something on GPT-4 that a reasonable observer would say we’re going to steamroll you.” Not might. Not could. Going to. He said it with the calm of someone describing weather. Because to him it is weather. The model improves. Whatever was built on the old version’s weaknesses gets washed away. That is not strategy. That is erosion. And most founders are building on the erosion line. They find a gap in the current model. They wrap a product around it. They raise money. They hire. They scale. Then OpenAI releases the next version and the gap closes and the product has no reason to exist anymore. Altman: “When we just do our fundamental job, which is make the model better with every crank, then you get the ‘OpenAI killed my startup’ meme.” He is telling you directly. They are not hunting you. They are not even thinking about you. They are just improving the model. You happen to be standing where the improvement lands. That is the part founders refuse to hear. OpenAI does not need to compete with you. It just needs to keep doing exactly what it was already doing and your entire company disappears as a side effect. You are not a competitor. You are a temporary symptom of incomplete intelligence. The moment the intelligence completes you become nothing. Then Brad Lightcap delivered the cleanest diagnostic ever spoken in venture capital. Lightcap: “Ask if a 100x improvement in the model is something they’re excited about.” One question. The entire investment thesis reduced to a single binary. Does the next model make your company more powerful or does it make your company pointless. There is no middle ground. Lightcap: “We know the companies that come to us saying, ‘We want the next model. When is it coming out? I want to be the first to try it.’” These companies built something that feeds on intelligence. The smarter the model gets the more their product can do. They are not threatened by progress. They are starving for it. Then there are the companies Lightcap never hears from. The ones who go quiet when a new model drops. The ones who read the release notes like a death sentence. The ones privately praying the next generation takes longer because every improvement shrinks the ground beneath them. If you are hoping the model stays roughly where it is you have already told the market everything it needs to know about your company. You are not building on intelligence. You are building on the absence of it. Altman: “95% of the world should be betting on the latter category.” The latter category is simple. Assume the model keeps getting better at the pace it has been getting better. Build for that world. Not the world where GPT-4 is the ceiling. The world where GPT-4 is the floor and the ceiling has not been built yet. Then Altman told a story that should be framed on the wall of every startup in the country. A medical AI company came to him that morning. They were not complaining about the model. They were not worried about being replaced. They were demanding it improve faster. Altman: “Here’s how many people are dying every day you delay.” That is what alignment with the trajectory looks like. A company so deeply built on intelligence improving that every day the model stays the same is a day someone dies who did not have to. They are not building on a flaw. They are building on a future that has not arrived fast enough. That is the difference. The wrapper startup patches what the model cannot do today. The real company builds what the model will unlock tomorrow. One is running from the train. The other is laying the track. Altman told you the train is not slowing down. Lightcap told you exactly how to know which side you are on. One question. Does a 100x smarter model make you more valuable or erase you. If you had to pause before answering you already did.
2:28

Sam Altman just handed every startup founder a one-question autopsy. Altman: “If you’re building something on GPT-4 that a reasonable observer would say we’re going to steamroll you.” Not might. Not could. Going to. He said it with the calm of someone describing weather. Because to him it is weather. The model improves. Whatever was built on the old version’s weaknesses gets washed away. That is not strategy. That is erosion. And most founders are building on the erosion line. They find a gap in the current model. They wrap a product around it. They raise money. They hire. They scale. Then OpenAI releases the next version and the gap closes and the product has no reason to exist anymore. Altman: “When we just do our fundamental job, which is make the model better with every crank, then you get the ‘OpenAI killed my startup’ meme.” He is telling you directly. They are not hunting you. They are not even thinking about you. They are just improving the model. You happen to be standing where the improvement lands. That is the part founders refuse to hear. OpenAI does not need to compete with you. It just needs to keep doing exactly what it was already doing and your entire company disappears as a side effect. You are not a competitor. You are a temporary symptom of incomplete intelligence. The moment the intelligence completes you become nothing. Then Brad Lightcap delivered the cleanest diagnostic ever spoken in venture capital. Lightcap: “Ask if a 100x improvement in the model is something they’re excited about.” One question. The entire investment thesis reduced to a single binary. Does the next model make your company more powerful or does it make your company pointless. There is no middle ground. Lightcap: “We know the companies that come to us saying, ‘We want the next model. When is it coming out? I want to be the first to try it.’” These companies built something that feeds on intelligence. The smarter the model gets the more their product can do. They are not threatened by progress. They are starving for it. Then there are the companies Lightcap never hears from. The ones who go quiet when a new model drops. The ones who read the release notes like a death sentence. The ones privately praying the next generation takes longer because every improvement shrinks the ground beneath them. If you are hoping the model stays roughly where it is you have already told the market everything it needs to know about your company. You are not building on intelligence. You are building on the absence of it. Altman: “95% of the world should be betting on the latter category.” The latter category is simple. Assume the model keeps getting better at the pace it has been getting better. Build for that world. Not the world where GPT-4 is the ceiling. The world where GPT-4 is the floor and the ceiling has not been built yet. Then Altman told a story that should be framed on the wall of every startup in the country. A medical AI company came to him that morning. They were not complaining about the model. They were not worried about being replaced. They were demanding it improve faster. Altman: “Here’s how many people are dying every day you delay.” That is what alignment with the trajectory looks like. A company so deeply built on intelligence improving that every day the model stays the same is a day someone dies who did not have to. They are not building on a flaw. They are building on a future that has not arrived fast enough. That is the difference. The wrapper startup patches what the model cannot do today. The real company builds what the model will unlock tomorrow. One is running from the train. The other is laying the track. Altman told you the train is not slowing down. Lightcap told you exactly how to know which side you are on. One question. Does a 100x smarter model make you more valuable or erase you. If you had to pause before answering you already did.

Dustin

39,109 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Do you think that by the folly of man, the glory of God can be diminished? . I tell you, no kingdom of this earth, no rebellion of heart, no blasphemy of tongue can ever tarnish the majesty of the Almighty. His glory is not made by the hands of men, nor is it undone by their defiance. . Consider the arrogance of those who refuse to kneel, who claim that their disbelief can unmake the Creator. They are like madmen in a darkened cell, scratching the word ‘darkness’ upon the walls as though, by their crude mark, they could blot out the sun. But tell me, does the sun diminish because it is unseen by the blind? Does its light falter because a lunatic curses its name? No, my friend. The sun remains, burning with relentless brilliance, giving life to all who dwell beneath it, whether they acknowledge it or not. . So it is with God. His glory is eternal, unshaken by the denial of men. He is the architect of the heavens, the One who breathed life into dust and set the stars upon their courses. His majesty does not depend on our worship, yet it is we who are diminished when we turn away. For in refusing to see His light, we do not extinguish it—we only cast ourselves into the shadow of our own making. . Know that to deny God is not an act of power but of despair. It is the rejection of hope, the refusal to see the beauty written into the very fabric of existence. A man who scribbles darkness upon the walls of his soul does not conquer the light, he only blinds himself to it. Yet even in his rebellion, God’s glory shines undimmed. For the sun does not cease to rise because a man refuses to look upon it. And God does not cease to reign because His children wander from His embrace. . If you ever find yourself in doubt, remember this: the defiance of man is but a whisper against the roar of eternity. The glory of God is as unyielding as the mountains and as boundless as the sea. It is woven into the sunrise, the turning of the seasons, the song of creation itself. You cannot destroy it. You cannot unmake it. You can only choose whether to bask in its light or to linger in the shadows. . Take heart, then and do not be swayed by the noise of those who mock the divine. For their words are as fleeting as the wind but the glory of God is eternal. Acknowledge Him not because He needs your praise but because your soul needs His light. Worship Him not as a favor to the Almighty but as a declaration that you see, that you understand, that you are humbled by the grandeur of the One who crafted all that is and all that ever will be. . God’s glory is not diminished by denial, nor is it amplified by praise. But you, my friend—you are elevated when you bow before the Eternal. You are strengthened when you trust in the One who holds the stars in place. And you are transformed when you abandon the shadows of pride and step into the radiance of His truth. . Remember this always: the lunatic may scrawl his defiance but he cannot extinguish the light. The doubter may deny the sun but he cannot halt its rise. And the world may rage against the King of Kings but it cannot dethrone Him. Stand firm, therefore, as one who walks in the light of God. Let your life be a testimony that His glory endures forever, unshaken, unyielding and undeniable. . For in the end, my friend, it is not God who is diminished by our defiance. It is we. And it is not the sun that falters when we turn away—it is the world that grows colder in its absence. #ChristIsKing #WeAreTheStorm
0:23

Do you think that by the folly of man, the glory of God can be diminished? . I tell you, no kingdom of this earth, no rebellion of heart, no blasphemy of tongue can ever tarnish the majesty of the Almighty. His glory is not made by the hands of men, nor is it undone by their defiance. . Consider the arrogance of those who refuse to kneel, who claim that their disbelief can unmake the Creator. They are like madmen in a darkened cell, scratching the word ‘darkness’ upon the walls as though, by their crude mark, they could blot out the sun. But tell me, does the sun diminish because it is unseen by the blind? Does its light falter because a lunatic curses its name? No, my friend. The sun remains, burning with relentless brilliance, giving life to all who dwell beneath it, whether they acknowledge it or not. . So it is with God. His glory is eternal, unshaken by the denial of men. He is the architect of the heavens, the One who breathed life into dust and set the stars upon their courses. His majesty does not depend on our worship, yet it is we who are diminished when we turn away. For in refusing to see His light, we do not extinguish it—we only cast ourselves into the shadow of our own making. . Know that to deny God is not an act of power but of despair. It is the rejection of hope, the refusal to see the beauty written into the very fabric of existence. A man who scribbles darkness upon the walls of his soul does not conquer the light, he only blinds himself to it. Yet even in his rebellion, God’s glory shines undimmed. For the sun does not cease to rise because a man refuses to look upon it. And God does not cease to reign because His children wander from His embrace. . If you ever find yourself in doubt, remember this: the defiance of man is but a whisper against the roar of eternity. The glory of God is as unyielding as the mountains and as boundless as the sea. It is woven into the sunrise, the turning of the seasons, the song of creation itself. You cannot destroy it. You cannot unmake it. You can only choose whether to bask in its light or to linger in the shadows. . Take heart, then and do not be swayed by the noise of those who mock the divine. For their words are as fleeting as the wind but the glory of God is eternal. Acknowledge Him not because He needs your praise but because your soul needs His light. Worship Him not as a favor to the Almighty but as a declaration that you see, that you understand, that you are humbled by the grandeur of the One who crafted all that is and all that ever will be. . God’s glory is not diminished by denial, nor is it amplified by praise. But you, my friend—you are elevated when you bow before the Eternal. You are strengthened when you trust in the One who holds the stars in place. And you are transformed when you abandon the shadows of pride and step into the radiance of His truth. . Remember this always: the lunatic may scrawl his defiance but he cannot extinguish the light. The doubter may deny the sun but he cannot halt its rise. And the world may rage against the King of Kings but it cannot dethrone Him. Stand firm, therefore, as one who walks in the light of God. Let your life be a testimony that His glory endures forever, unshaken, unyielding and undeniable. . For in the end, my friend, it is not God who is diminished by our defiance. It is we. And it is not the sun that falters when we turn away—it is the world that grows colder in its absence. #ChristIsKing #WeAreTheStorm

The Redeemed

56,357 просмотров • 1 год назад

Elon Musk just said the quiet part out loud about government and AI. Musk: “AI is moving 10 times faster than government, maybe more.” Not slightly ahead. Not a few years out in front. Ten times faster. And pulling away. Every regulatory body on earth runs on the same architecture. Committees form. Hearings are scheduled. Legislation is drafted, debated, revised, and passed. By the time a law exists, the thing it was written to govern has already moved three generations beyond it. That architecture was built for a world that moves at human speed. This world does not. Musk: “The one thing that the government can do is just issue people money.” Not regulate. Not protect. Not steer. Issue money. That is not a policy position. That is a surrender. The most powerful governments on earth, sitting on top of the most sophisticated legal and military infrastructure in human history, reduced to a single remaining function. Sending people checks. Because they cannot move fast enough to do anything else. Now sit with what that actually means. For ten thousand years, the central bargain of civilization was simple. You contribute labor. Society functions. You eat. The system needed you. That bargain is being quietly retired. The machine does not need you to run the factory. Does not need you to process the paperwork. Does not need you to write the code or drive the truck or staff the call center. And the government already knows it. Musk: “Nobody’s gonna starve is what I’m saying.” He is right. The floor is rising. Survival is becoming guaranteed. That should feel like the finish line. For most of human history, it would have been. But here is what nobody is saying out loud. The hard part was never survival. The hard part is what happens to a species that spent ten millennia being defined by its need to survive, the moment that need disappears. Purpose is not something the government can deposit into your account. A check covers rent. It does not answer the question of what you are for. When the thing that organized your days, justified your effort, and gave your life a legible shape gets handed to a machine, you do not automatically inherit freedom. You inherit a void. And a void with a guaranteed income is still a void. The people who will matter in this era are not the ones who cash the check and wait. They are the ones who hear the starting gun in it. For the first time in history, the baseline is solved. Which means the only question left is the one every generation before yours was too buried to ask. What are you actually here to build.
0:46

Elon Musk just said the quiet part out loud about government and AI. Musk: “AI is moving 10 times faster than government, maybe more.” Not slightly ahead. Not a few years out in front. Ten times faster. And pulling away. Every regulatory body on earth runs on the same architecture. Committees form. Hearings are scheduled. Legislation is drafted, debated, revised, and passed. By the time a law exists, the thing it was written to govern has already moved three generations beyond it. That architecture was built for a world that moves at human speed. This world does not. Musk: “The one thing that the government can do is just issue people money.” Not regulate. Not protect. Not steer. Issue money. That is not a policy position. That is a surrender. The most powerful governments on earth, sitting on top of the most sophisticated legal and military infrastructure in human history, reduced to a single remaining function. Sending people checks. Because they cannot move fast enough to do anything else. Now sit with what that actually means. For ten thousand years, the central bargain of civilization was simple. You contribute labor. Society functions. You eat. The system needed you. That bargain is being quietly retired. The machine does not need you to run the factory. Does not need you to process the paperwork. Does not need you to write the code or drive the truck or staff the call center. And the government already knows it. Musk: “Nobody’s gonna starve is what I’m saying.” He is right. The floor is rising. Survival is becoming guaranteed. That should feel like the finish line. For most of human history, it would have been. But here is what nobody is saying out loud. The hard part was never survival. The hard part is what happens to a species that spent ten millennia being defined by its need to survive, the moment that need disappears. Purpose is not something the government can deposit into your account. A check covers rent. It does not answer the question of what you are for. When the thing that organized your days, justified your effort, and gave your life a legible shape gets handed to a machine, you do not automatically inherit freedom. You inherit a void. And a void with a guaranteed income is still a void. The people who will matter in this era are not the ones who cash the check and wait. They are the ones who hear the starting gun in it. For the first time in history, the baseline is solved. Which means the only question left is the one every generation before yours was too buried to ask. What are you actually here to build.

Dustin

63,328 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Yes, indeed, this is lawlessness by any standard. Even by banana republic standards, this is still lawlessness. Your country has a constitution, it has a government, it has a police service, and it has a ruling party. I am sure you can see that some of the people there are actually wearing ruling party T-shirts. It is lawless regardless of whoever does it. It is an embarrassment to South Africa as a country, what you are doing and what you are encouraging people to do. Your country has an immigration service. If people are in your country illegally, they should be arrested and deported through lawful processes. You do not go around destroying property, tearing down markets, and attacking people. It is illegal regardless of whoever does it. It is not illegal because I have said so. It is illegal because the laws of your country make it so. This is vigilantism, pure and simple, and it is tainting the reputation of South Africa, not only across Africa but across the world. If you have got satellite television in your home, you can see that these actions are being reported everywhere. It is not good for your country. This kind of barbarism undermines the rule of law, fuels division, and damages South Africa’s standing as a constitutional democracy. It is the actions of a few that are tainting the reputation of many. The average South African is not mindless like this. They respect the law, and they respect the fact that among them, in their communities, there are people from other countries. If those people are in the country illegally, you report them and the law takes its course through proper processes of arrest and deportation. You do not descend into mob justice, lawlessness, and destruction. That is not who South Africans are, and it must not be normalised.
2:51

Yes, indeed, this is lawlessness by any standard. Even by banana republic standards, this is still lawlessness. Your country has a constitution, it has a government, it has a police service, and it has a ruling party. I am sure you can see that some of the people there are actually wearing ruling party T-shirts. It is lawless regardless of whoever does it. It is an embarrassment to South Africa as a country, what you are doing and what you are encouraging people to do. Your country has an immigration service. If people are in your country illegally, they should be arrested and deported through lawful processes. You do not go around destroying property, tearing down markets, and attacking people. It is illegal regardless of whoever does it. It is not illegal because I have said so. It is illegal because the laws of your country make it so. This is vigilantism, pure and simple, and it is tainting the reputation of South Africa, not only across Africa but across the world. If you have got satellite television in your home, you can see that these actions are being reported everywhere. It is not good for your country. This kind of barbarism undermines the rule of law, fuels division, and damages South Africa’s standing as a constitutional democracy. It is the actions of a few that are tainting the reputation of many. The average South African is not mindless like this. They respect the law, and they respect the fact that among them, in their communities, there are people from other countries. If those people are in the country illegally, you report them and the law takes its course through proper processes of arrest and deportation. You do not descend into mob justice, lawlessness, and destruction. That is not who South Africans are, and it must not be normalised.

Hopewell Chin’ono

80,812 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Dario Amodei just told software engineers exactly how long they have. Six to twelve months. Amodei: “I have engineers within Anthropic who say I don’t write any code anymore. I just let the model write the code, I edit it, I do the things around it.” The people building the most powerful AI in history have already stopped writing code. That is not a forecast. That is the current working condition inside the lab closest to the frontier. Amodei: “We might be six to 12 months away from when the model is doing most, maybe all, of what SWEs do end-to-end.” The tech industry spent a decade making software engineers its highest-paid, most protected class. That era has a last day now. When a model can execute an entire software build end-to-end, the ability to write syntax stops being a skill. It becomes a credential for a job that no longer exists. Amodei: “And then it’s a question of how fast does that loop close.” That is the sentence everyone skipped. The code was never the hard part. The hard part was everything around it. The model just learned everything around it. Writing the code is already nearly gone. Testing is next. Deployment is next. When all three collapse into a single autonomous execution loop, the machine no longer needs a human in the chain at all. The corporation or sovereign state that closes that loop first does not gain a competitive advantage. It gains a category of speed that biological engineers cannot match, track, or reverse. That is not disruption. That is replacement at a systems level. Amodei is not describing a future disruption. He is describing the current state of his own building. The loop is already closing. The only question is whether you are inside it or outside it when it seals.
0:27

Dario Amodei just told software engineers exactly how long they have. Six to twelve months. Amodei: “I have engineers within Anthropic who say I don’t write any code anymore. I just let the model write the code, I edit it, I do the things around it.” The people building the most powerful AI in history have already stopped writing code. That is not a forecast. That is the current working condition inside the lab closest to the frontier. Amodei: “We might be six to 12 months away from when the model is doing most, maybe all, of what SWEs do end-to-end.” The tech industry spent a decade making software engineers its highest-paid, most protected class. That era has a last day now. When a model can execute an entire software build end-to-end, the ability to write syntax stops being a skill. It becomes a credential for a job that no longer exists. Amodei: “And then it’s a question of how fast does that loop close.” That is the sentence everyone skipped. The code was never the hard part. The hard part was everything around it. The model just learned everything around it. Writing the code is already nearly gone. Testing is next. Deployment is next. When all three collapse into a single autonomous execution loop, the machine no longer needs a human in the chain at all. The corporation or sovereign state that closes that loop first does not gain a competitive advantage. It gains a category of speed that biological engineers cannot match, track, or reverse. That is not disruption. That is replacement at a systems level. Amodei is not describing a future disruption. He is describing the current state of his own building. The loop is already closing. The only question is whether you are inside it or outside it when it seals.

Dustin

318,698 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on what customers actually want, the real business of frontier labs, and the importance of open source models: “What the technical customers want is control over their compute, their models, their data stack, and their alpha. They want to know they own the means of production, and it's not being transferred to someone else.” "Who owns the data? Are the prompts secure? Is this being transferred to you?" "If it was so valuable, and I can make you a billion dollars, wouldn't I say I'll make you a billion dollars and I want 30%? Why are they charging for tokens if it's so valuable?"
2:49

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on what customers actually want, the real business of frontier labs, and the importance of open source models: “What the technical customers want is control over their compute, their models, their data stack, and their alpha. They want to know they own the means of production, and it's not being transferred to someone else.” "Who owns the data? Are the prompts secure? Is this being transferred to you?" "If it was so valuable, and I can make you a billion dollars, wouldn't I say I'll make you a billion dollars and I want 30%? Why are they charging for tokens if it's so valuable?"

Palantir

4,519,745 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Elon Musk was asked what happens to people when the machines no longer need them. He didn’t soften it. Musk: “There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. These are not things I wish would happen. They probably will.” Sit with that second sentence. He is not celebrating. He is not selling a vision. He is telling you what he believes is inevitable and admitting he wishes it weren’t. That is not optimism. That is a confession. Most people are still arguing over whether this is real. Whether it’s their job or someone else’s. Whether the timeline is years away or decades. Musk isn’t arguing. He resolved it. And it bothers him. Musk: “I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income. I don’t think we’re going to have a choice.” Not a political position. Not a utopian proposal. A concession. We are building something so capable that human labor stops being a required input to the economy. The machine does not need rest. It does not need a salary. It does not call in sick. It does not ask for a raise. And it improves every single month. The jobs that feel safe right now are not safe because they are irreplaceable. They feel safe because the technology hasn’t fully arrived yet. It’s arriving. Musk: “How do people then have meaning? If there’s not a need for your labor, what’s the meaning? Do you feel useless?” He said that is the harder problem. Not the economics. Not the policy. Not how you fund UBI or make it hold. The harder problem is what happens to a person who built their entire identity around being needed. That is most people. You were trained from childhood to believe your value is what you produce. That your worth is what you earn. That rest is something you survive the week to reach, not something you deserve simply by existing. When the machine removes the need for your labor, that belief does not update. It breaks. The people least prepared for that moment are the ones who worked the hardest. The ones who took the most pride in being indispensable. The ones who made work the whole answer. Losing the job is survivable. Losing the reason to get up is not. That is what Musk is actually asking. Not how do we pay people. How do we build a world where people still feel like they matter when the economy no longer needs them. Nobody in power is seriously working on that answer. The machine didn’t wait.
1:16

Elon Musk was asked what happens to people when the machines no longer need them. He didn’t soften it. Musk: “There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. These are not things I wish would happen. They probably will.” Sit with that second sentence. He is not celebrating. He is not selling a vision. He is telling you what he believes is inevitable and admitting he wishes it weren’t. That is not optimism. That is a confession. Most people are still arguing over whether this is real. Whether it’s their job or someone else’s. Whether the timeline is years away or decades. Musk isn’t arguing. He resolved it. And it bothers him. Musk: “I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income. I don’t think we’re going to have a choice.” Not a political position. Not a utopian proposal. A concession. We are building something so capable that human labor stops being a required input to the economy. The machine does not need rest. It does not need a salary. It does not call in sick. It does not ask for a raise. And it improves every single month. The jobs that feel safe right now are not safe because they are irreplaceable. They feel safe because the technology hasn’t fully arrived yet. It’s arriving. Musk: “How do people then have meaning? If there’s not a need for your labor, what’s the meaning? Do you feel useless?” He said that is the harder problem. Not the economics. Not the policy. Not how you fund UBI or make it hold. The harder problem is what happens to a person who built their entire identity around being needed. That is most people. You were trained from childhood to believe your value is what you produce. That your worth is what you earn. That rest is something you survive the week to reach, not something you deserve simply by existing. When the machine removes the need for your labor, that belief does not update. It breaks. The people least prepared for that moment are the ones who worked the hardest. The ones who took the most pride in being indispensable. The ones who made work the whole answer. Losing the job is survivable. Losing the reason to get up is not. That is what Musk is actually asking. Not how do we pay people. How do we build a world where people still feel like they matter when the economy no longer needs them. Nobody in power is seriously working on that answer. The machine didn’t wait.

Dustin

247,138 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Maponga Marara offers a thought-provoking perspective on Xenophobia in South Africa. Is the white man dividing black brothers and sisters when it's actually them that have the economy and the means of production? "Is it not interesting that they are fighting for jobs? Jobs? Not ownership of industries. They are not fighting to own the businesses. They are fighting for the jobs. So maybe the real question to ask is: who is giving the jobs? "
2:54

Maponga Marara offers a thought-provoking perspective on Xenophobia in South Africa. Is the white man dividing black brothers and sisters when it's actually them that have the economy and the means of production? "Is it not interesting that they are fighting for jobs? Jobs? Not ownership of industries. They are not fighting to own the businesses. They are fighting for the jobs. So maybe the real question to ask is: who is giving the jobs? "

THEE ALFA HOUSE

26,893 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Mark Cuban revealed the secrets that turned him from bartender to billionaire: 1. Do not follow your passion. Follow your effort. Where you actually put your time and energy is where your real talent lives. Passion is a feeling. Effort is evidence. The business you are willing to grind for is the business you should be building. 2. Read the manual. In any new industry or technology, most people are too lazy to learn the basics. The person who simply takes the time to understand how something works will always be ahead of the person who does not. That gap is your opportunity. 3. Sweat equity is the best equity. Raising money is not an achievement. It is a liability. The moment someone gives you money they own a piece of your destiny. Build with effort first and capital second. 4. Be profitable from day one. Cuban never had a losing month at Micro Solutions. Not one. Profit is not something you figure out later. It is the discipline you build from the very first transaction. Growth without profit is just a slow death. 5. Sales cures all. Every single problem in a business can be solved with more revenue. If you are struggling, you are not selling enough. Stop fixing internal problems and go get more customers. 6. Differentiation is everything. If you are describing your company using words like faster, better, or cheaper you have already lost. Those words mean nothing because your competitor is saying the exact same thing. Find the thing only you can do and make that the whole story. 7. Always ask is this the best possible way. Cuban does not just look at businesses and think about improvements. He looks at them and asks whether they can be completely dismantled and rebuilt from scratch. That question is what turned a desire to hear basketball games into a company he sold for billions. 8. Control your own destiny. The minute you become dependent on a partner, an investor, or a single customer for survival, you have handed your future to someone else. Every decision you make should protect your ability to operate independently. 9. Entrepreneurship is not about the idea. It is about doing the work everyone else refuses to do. Most people get excited about an idea, talk about it, and stop there. The ones who win are the ones who wake up the next day and actually do something about it. 10. Lie to yourself and you will fail. Cuban says entrepreneurs deceive themselves more than anyone. About whether their idea is truly different. About how hard their competition will fight back. About how much time they actually have. Brutal honesty with yourself is not optional. It is survival. 11. Time is worth more than money. Cuban turns down investments not because of the financials but because of the time they will cost him. Money can be made again. Time cannot be recovered. Every opportunity should be measured against what it costs you in hours not just dollars. 12. Success is waking up excited about the day. Not the net worth. Not the title. Not the house. Cuban defines success as opening your eyes in the morning and feeling genuinely excited about what is ahead. Everything else, the money, the fame, the Mavericks, is just a byproduct of that feeling.
47:48

Mark Cuban revealed the secrets that turned him from bartender to billionaire: 1. Do not follow your passion. Follow your effort. Where you actually put your time and energy is where your real talent lives. Passion is a feeling. Effort is evidence. The business you are willing to grind for is the business you should be building. 2. Read the manual. In any new industry or technology, most people are too lazy to learn the basics. The person who simply takes the time to understand how something works will always be ahead of the person who does not. That gap is your opportunity. 3. Sweat equity is the best equity. Raising money is not an achievement. It is a liability. The moment someone gives you money they own a piece of your destiny. Build with effort first and capital second. 4. Be profitable from day one. Cuban never had a losing month at Micro Solutions. Not one. Profit is not something you figure out later. It is the discipline you build from the very first transaction. Growth without profit is just a slow death. 5. Sales cures all. Every single problem in a business can be solved with more revenue. If you are struggling, you are not selling enough. Stop fixing internal problems and go get more customers. 6. Differentiation is everything. If you are describing your company using words like faster, better, or cheaper you have already lost. Those words mean nothing because your competitor is saying the exact same thing. Find the thing only you can do and make that the whole story. 7. Always ask is this the best possible way. Cuban does not just look at businesses and think about improvements. He looks at them and asks whether they can be completely dismantled and rebuilt from scratch. That question is what turned a desire to hear basketball games into a company he sold for billions. 8. Control your own destiny. The minute you become dependent on a partner, an investor, or a single customer for survival, you have handed your future to someone else. Every decision you make should protect your ability to operate independently. 9. Entrepreneurship is not about the idea. It is about doing the work everyone else refuses to do. Most people get excited about an idea, talk about it, and stop there. The ones who win are the ones who wake up the next day and actually do something about it. 10. Lie to yourself and you will fail. Cuban says entrepreneurs deceive themselves more than anyone. About whether their idea is truly different. About how hard their competition will fight back. About how much time they actually have. Brutal honesty with yourself is not optional. It is survival. 11. Time is worth more than money. Cuban turns down investments not because of the financials but because of the time they will cost him. Money can be made again. Time cannot be recovered. Every opportunity should be measured against what it costs you in hours not just dollars. 12. Success is waking up excited about the day. Not the net worth. Not the title. Not the house. Cuban defines success as opening your eyes in the morning and feeling genuinely excited about what is ahead. Everything else, the money, the fame, the Mavericks, is just a byproduct of that feeling.

Brad

117,921 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

your agent reviewing its own work is not a check. it is a second opinion from the same source. this is the most common gap in agent systems and it hides in plain sight, because the step exists. there is a review. it just cannot do the thing you think it does. here is the mechanism. the model produced an output from a context. you then ask the same model, holding the same context, whether that output is correct. it answers fluently, because that is what it does. and the answer is drawn from the same distribution that produced the thing being judged. same weights, same window, same blind spots. if the reason the output is wrong is something the model does not know, the review does not know it either. if the reason is something the context does not contain, the review has the same context. the failure mode and the detector share a cause. > why it feels like it works because most of the time the output is fine, and the review says fine. agreement is not evidence of detection. a reviewer that says pass on everything agrees with reality most of the time too. what you actually want to measure is what happens on the cases that are wrong. that is the only place a check earns its name, and it is exactly the place where a self-review is weakest. there is research on this. Huang and colleagues at DeepMind showed at ICLR 2024 that intrinsic self-correction, revising without external grounding, does not reliably help and often makes things worse. > what to actually do move the check outside the model. a test that runs, a schema that validates, a file that exists or does not, an exit code from something you did not write. these are not smarter than the model. they are just not correlated with it, and that is the entire value. when the judgement genuinely needs a model, at minimum use a different family. same family means shared blind spots, and frontier judges measurably inflate scores for outputs that look like their own. and split the work by kind. anything objectively checkable goes to code. only the genuinely semantic calls go to a judge, and those get a rubric written as one line. a review inside the loop tells you the model is confident. a check outside it tells you whether the work is done. save this - then read the eval setup below
0:50

your agent reviewing its own work is not a check. it is a second opinion from the same source. this is the most common gap in agent systems and it hides in plain sight, because the step exists. there is a review. it just cannot do the thing you think it does. here is the mechanism. the model produced an output from a context. you then ask the same model, holding the same context, whether that output is correct. it answers fluently, because that is what it does. and the answer is drawn from the same distribution that produced the thing being judged. same weights, same window, same blind spots. if the reason the output is wrong is something the model does not know, the review does not know it either. if the reason is something the context does not contain, the review has the same context. the failure mode and the detector share a cause. > why it feels like it works because most of the time the output is fine, and the review says fine. agreement is not evidence of detection. a reviewer that says pass on everything agrees with reality most of the time too. what you actually want to measure is what happens on the cases that are wrong. that is the only place a check earns its name, and it is exactly the place where a self-review is weakest. there is research on this. Huang and colleagues at DeepMind showed at ICLR 2024 that intrinsic self-correction, revising without external grounding, does not reliably help and often makes things worse. > what to actually do move the check outside the model. a test that runs, a schema that validates, a file that exists or does not, an exit code from something you did not write. these are not smarter than the model. they are just not correlated with it, and that is the entire value. when the judgement genuinely needs a model, at minimum use a different family. same family means shared blind spots, and frontier judges measurably inflate scores for outputs that look like their own. and split the work by kind. anything objectively checkable goes to code. only the genuinely semantic calls go to a judge, and those get a rubric written as one line. a review inside the loop tells you the model is confident. a check outside it tells you whether the work is done. save this - then read the eval setup below

Hanako

14,325 просмотров • 26 дней назад

The Green Party would have you believe that hope and solidarity won them the Gorton and Denton by-election. I beg to differ. What this by-election gave us was a window into the future of the United Kingdom. A future where attempts to rig elections are no longer hidden. Where sectarianism plays a dominant role. Where the flag of Pakistan is openly waved in the streets of an English constituency. It will only get worse. They will be emboldened by this. After all, in the end, the result wasn’t even close. None of this should surprise anyone who has been paying attention. I’ve been at this for approaching eight years. Everything I have been documenting, everything I have been warning about, is exactly what you witnessed. The institutions dismissed it. The press ignored it. And yet here we are. Which brings me to the question everyone on the right is now avoiding - what does this mean for Reform? Reform need to win seats like Denton and Gorton if they are serious about the next General Election. That they didn’t come close is significant. What it tells you is that they do not have the experience to fight the cartels. You cannot parachute in PPE graduates and expect them to understand what they’re walking into. Enthusiasm is not a strategy. Optimism is not a ground operation. But this is not a counsel of despair. We know it can be done, because we have done it. In Oldham, election after election, we have faced these exact tactics and beaten them. We have defeated the metropolitan elite, the mobsters, and their bloc voting Muslim partners in 4 consecutive elections where we took out their party leaders and took the council into no overall control. By whatever means necessary, the Greens got their candidate over the line in Gorton and Denton. The tactics they and Labour used only surprised people who have never witnessed them before. We have. And we won anyway. Experience is not transferable from a seminar room. If Reform are serious, they need to start learning from the people who have actually fought this battle and not from those who have merely read about it.
0:22

The Green Party would have you believe that hope and solidarity won them the Gorton and Denton by-election. I beg to differ. What this by-election gave us was a window into the future of the United Kingdom. A future where attempts to rig elections are no longer hidden. Where sectarianism plays a dominant role. Where the flag of Pakistan is openly waved in the streets of an English constituency. It will only get worse. They will be emboldened by this. After all, in the end, the result wasn’t even close. None of this should surprise anyone who has been paying attention. I’ve been at this for approaching eight years. Everything I have been documenting, everything I have been warning about, is exactly what you witnessed. The institutions dismissed it. The press ignored it. And yet here we are. Which brings me to the question everyone on the right is now avoiding - what does this mean for Reform? Reform need to win seats like Denton and Gorton if they are serious about the next General Election. That they didn’t come close is significant. What it tells you is that they do not have the experience to fight the cartels. You cannot parachute in PPE graduates and expect them to understand what they’re walking into. Enthusiasm is not a strategy. Optimism is not a ground operation. But this is not a counsel of despair. We know it can be done, because we have done it. In Oldham, election after election, we have faced these exact tactics and beaten them. We have defeated the metropolitan elite, the mobsters, and their bloc voting Muslim partners in 4 consecutive elections where we took out their party leaders and took the council into no overall control. By whatever means necessary, the Greens got their candidate over the line in Gorton and Denton. The tactics they and Labour used only surprised people who have never witnessed them before. We have. And we won anyway. Experience is not transferable from a seminar room. If Reform are serious, they need to start learning from the people who have actually fought this battle and not from those who have merely read about it.

Raja Miah

144,987 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

"Constipated." That is the word now being used for the private credit market. And it is exactly what this looks like. The private credit story is changing. For months it was framed as a liquidity problem. Investors trying to pull their money out. That is still a huge problem. BlackRock just had a couple of funds suffering big runs. But there is a bigger one. It is no longer just the investors who want out. It is the investors outside who no longer want in. And that is the much bigger story. Because the private credit boom was built on flows. Constant inflows from wealth managers, pensions, insurance companies, and the general public. That is how big it got. The machine has to keep moving. Money comes in. Loans get made. Funds grow. Redemptions get handled. Managers collect their fees. Everyone pretends it is calm because the marks are smooth and the exits are limited. Now the machine is reversing. Reuters reported US direct lending issuance in the three months ending May was down roughly 40% from the first quarter. Issuance to private-equity-backed borrowers dropped nearly 37%. Volume tied to leveraged buyouts fell about 34%. So this is no longer just a redemption story. The exits are clogged. New money is hesitant. Sellers will not cut prices, and buyers will not pay yesterday's valuations. Credit funds are handling redemptions. Leveraged loans are showing strain. And publicly traded BDCs are not rebounding, even as the broader market soars. So the question is no longer whether investors are still withdrawing. They are, and it is accelerating. It is not about the people inside who want out. It is about the people outside who no longer want in. That is the bigger problem. It pushes us deeper into stage two, and the odds of stage three go up from here.
2:11

"Constipated." That is the word now being used for the private credit market. And it is exactly what this looks like. The private credit story is changing. For months it was framed as a liquidity problem. Investors trying to pull their money out. That is still a huge problem. BlackRock just had a couple of funds suffering big runs. But there is a bigger one. It is no longer just the investors who want out. It is the investors outside who no longer want in. And that is the much bigger story. Because the private credit boom was built on flows. Constant inflows from wealth managers, pensions, insurance companies, and the general public. That is how big it got. The machine has to keep moving. Money comes in. Loans get made. Funds grow. Redemptions get handled. Managers collect their fees. Everyone pretends it is calm because the marks are smooth and the exits are limited. Now the machine is reversing. Reuters reported US direct lending issuance in the three months ending May was down roughly 40% from the first quarter. Issuance to private-equity-backed borrowers dropped nearly 37%. Volume tied to leveraged buyouts fell about 34%. So this is no longer just a redemption story. The exits are clogged. New money is hesitant. Sellers will not cut prices, and buyers will not pay yesterday's valuations. Credit funds are handling redemptions. Leveraged loans are showing strain. And publicly traded BDCs are not rebounding, even as the broader market soars. So the question is no longer whether investors are still withdrawing. They are, and it is accelerating. It is not about the people inside who want out. It is about the people outside who no longer want in. That is the bigger problem. It pushes us deeper into stage two, and the odds of stage three go up from here.

Jeffrey P. Snider

24,551 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

every question in this clip is an ownership question, especially data because when everyone has access to the same intelligence, the only input that separates your business from the next one is the data you own your data is decades of decisions, customers, mistakes, and edge cases that exist nowhere else on earth that is the moat and enterprises are waking up to the fact that they've been leaking it one api call at a time my prediction is this: data ownership is going to absolutely matter in the world we're going into and whoever's building the infrastructure for it is going to have a very good decade.
0:48

every question in this clip is an ownership question, especially data because when everyone has access to the same intelligence, the only input that separates your business from the next one is the data you own your data is decades of decisions, customers, mistakes, and edge cases that exist nowhere else on earth that is the moat and enterprises are waking up to the fact that they've been leaking it one api call at a time my prediction is this: data ownership is going to absolutely matter in the world we're going into and whoever's building the infrastructure for it is going to have a very good decade.

Adeniyi.sui

13,834 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

This is something the Cabal propagandists will not show you. A stellar moment - one that will echo in eternity - of Hon. Edwin Mushoriwa Edwin Mushoriwa-Dzivaresekwa MP defending & upholding the dignity and sovereignty of our people. Instead, they will show you and celebrate the clown Susan, because under the Cabal's leadership, Zimbabwe has become a circus. Alas, those of us who have served with honour, loyalty, and respect have no problem taking off our hats to any truth and idea that pursues a better and brighter future for our people. What Hon. Mushoriwa has done here is commendable. It puts the Cabal to shame - if it still had any shame left, it would not show its face anywhere pushing for #CAB3. He stood & spoke of sovereignty - not as an abstraction, but as the lived reality of the people of Dzivaresekwa who elected him for five years, not seven!!! They gave their consent. He is bound by it. To extend that term without returning to them is not governance. It is theft by calendar!!! This is the core of constitutionalism: that the people are the source of all authority, and what they have not given, no parliament may take. The Cabal has forgotten this. Mushoriwa reminded the nation!!! He spoke of the Constitution as a shield - a document designed to limit politicians, not liberate them. The 2013 Constitution was a covenant. The people voted for it. They secured it with their hopes. And now the very politicians it was written to restrain are trying to rewrite it for their own perpetuation. That is not amendment. That is betrayal. Mushoriwa called it what it is: politicians limiting the Constitution instead of the Constitution limiting politicians. He spoke of accountability - the radical, dangerous, revolutionary idea that those who govern must answer to those who are governed. That elections are not inconvenient interruptions to development. They are the mechanism by which the people periodically renew or withdraw their trust. To cancel them is to cancel the people!!! To extend a term without consent is to declare that the people's voice is no longer required. Mushoriwa refused to endorse that declaration. And he spoke of the quiet tragedy at the centre of this coup - that the President, after 45 years of public service, may not want more years. It is the parliamentarians who have become the criminals surrounding him. The bought. The bribed. The Fortuner-driven. The envelope-collecting. They are the ones driving this. They are the ones who need the extension because they fear the voters they will face in 2028. The President is surrounded. Not by enemies. By courtiers!!! This is the politics the people deserve. Not the circus of the bought and the bribed. Not the spectacle of a legislator praising an interchange as though it were a constitutional argument. Principle. Sovereignty. Accountability. The Constitution as a shield, not a weapon. A parliamentarian who remembers who sent him and for how long. The Cabal will not show you this speech. It will bury it under empty press statements and misinformation narraitves!!! But the archive has it. The people have it. And history will remember who stood and who knelt!!!👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
2:18

This is something the Cabal propagandists will not show you. A stellar moment - one that will echo in eternity - of Hon. Edwin Mushoriwa Edwin Mushoriwa-Dzivaresekwa MP defending & upholding the dignity and sovereignty of our people. Instead, they will show you and celebrate the clown Susan, because under the Cabal's leadership, Zimbabwe has become a circus. Alas, those of us who have served with honour, loyalty, and respect have no problem taking off our hats to any truth and idea that pursues a better and brighter future for our people. What Hon. Mushoriwa has done here is commendable. It puts the Cabal to shame - if it still had any shame left, it would not show its face anywhere pushing for #CAB3. He stood & spoke of sovereignty - not as an abstraction, but as the lived reality of the people of Dzivaresekwa who elected him for five years, not seven!!! They gave their consent. He is bound by it. To extend that term without returning to them is not governance. It is theft by calendar!!! This is the core of constitutionalism: that the people are the source of all authority, and what they have not given, no parliament may take. The Cabal has forgotten this. Mushoriwa reminded the nation!!! He spoke of the Constitution as a shield - a document designed to limit politicians, not liberate them. The 2013 Constitution was a covenant. The people voted for it. They secured it with their hopes. And now the very politicians it was written to restrain are trying to rewrite it for their own perpetuation. That is not amendment. That is betrayal. Mushoriwa called it what it is: politicians limiting the Constitution instead of the Constitution limiting politicians. He spoke of accountability - the radical, dangerous, revolutionary idea that those who govern must answer to those who are governed. That elections are not inconvenient interruptions to development. They are the mechanism by which the people periodically renew or withdraw their trust. To cancel them is to cancel the people!!! To extend a term without consent is to declare that the people's voice is no longer required. Mushoriwa refused to endorse that declaration. And he spoke of the quiet tragedy at the centre of this coup - that the President, after 45 years of public service, may not want more years. It is the parliamentarians who have become the criminals surrounding him. The bought. The bribed. The Fortuner-driven. The envelope-collecting. They are the ones driving this. They are the ones who need the extension because they fear the voters they will face in 2028. The President is surrounded. Not by enemies. By courtiers!!! This is the politics the people deserve. Not the circus of the bought and the bribed. Not the spectacle of a legislator praising an interchange as though it were a constitutional argument. Principle. Sovereignty. Accountability. The Constitution as a shield, not a weapon. A parliamentarian who remembers who sent him and for how long. The Cabal will not show you this speech. It will bury it under empty press statements and misinformation narraitves!!! But the archive has it. The people have it. And history will remember who stood and who knelt!!!👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

ZVAMAINGA MUHONDO

16,503 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад