正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Wrong calculations

Science girl

3,523,378 subscribers

136,537 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

科学技术教育

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

«Wrong calculations»

«Wrong calculations»

Massimo

17,581,420 次观看 • 1 年前

«Wrong calculations» [📹tradiefckups]

«Wrong calculations» [📹tradiefckups]

Massimo

33,705 次观看 • 3 个月前

Priya Bandhu Suddhashil, the psephologist who got his calculations wrong only once in the past two decades, predicts a BJP win in the 2026 West Bengal election.

Priya Bandhu Suddhashil, the psephologist who got his calculations wrong only once in the past two decades, predicts a BJP win in the 2026 West Bengal election.

Surajit Dasgupta

25,545 次观看 • 3 个月前

"AIMIM was established in 2020. That means it is a 100 year old party." Is Arfa Khanum a madrasa pass-out that she’s making such wildly wrong calculations? 😂

"AIMIM was established in 2020. That means it is a 100 year old party." Is Arfa Khanum a madrasa pass-out that she’s making such wildly wrong calculations? 😂

Saffron Chargers

28,880 次观看 • 6 个月前

The government's inflation report is wrong. Their collection methods are flawed, the calculations are inaccurate, and the output is wildly off. More importantly, your personal inflation rate matters more than anything.

The government's inflation report is wrong. Their collection methods are flawed, the calculations are inaccurate, and the output is wildly off. More importantly, your personal inflation rate matters more than anything.

Anthony Pompliano 🌪

39,639 次观看 • 6 个月前

Congratulations to us @ SALMJAY 05 FARMS . We just completed the planting of 4000 cocoa Trees and 4000 Plantain suckers Our calculations was wrong so we’ll be adding another 2,000 cocoa trees and 2000 plantain suckers Thanks for rocking with the best up and coming farmer 🧑‍🌾 in Nigeria 🇳🇬 ✍️ : SIKIRU owner SALMJAY 05 FARMS

Congratulations to us @ SALMJAY 05 FARMS . We just completed the planting of 4000 cocoa Trees and 4000 Plantain suckers Our calculations was wrong so we’ll be adding another 2,000 cocoa trees and 2000 plantain suckers Thanks for rocking with the best up and coming farmer 🧑‍🌾 in Nigeria 🇳🇬 ✍️ : SIKIRU owner SALMJAY 05 FARMS

SIKIRU

14,998 次观看 • 1 个月前

Secretary of State Rubio today falsely claimed Mahmoud Khalil “justified” the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, saying it “had to happen” and was “necessary.” In fact, in his interview with Ezra Klein, Khalil described Oct. 7 as a “desperate attempt” by Hamas to make Palestinians heard, acknowledged that “targeting civilians is wrong,” and said the group’s “calculations… were not right.” He was explaining what he believes motivated the attack — not endorsing it.

Secretary of State Rubio today falsely claimed Mahmoud Khalil “justified” the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, saying it “had to happen” and was “necessary.” In fact, in his interview with Ezra Klein, Khalil described Oct. 7 as a “desperate attempt” by Hamas to make Palestinians heard, acknowledged that “targeting civilians is wrong,” and said the group’s “calculations… were not right.” He was explaining what he believes motivated the attack — not endorsing it.

Drop Site

110,325 次观看 • 1 年前

Did a simple ethanol check myself yesterday! Watch it till the end! Took 170 mL of E20 petrol, added 20 mL of water, shook it well, and after the layers separated, the water/ethanol layer measured 40 mL. That suggests roughly 20 mL of ethanol in 170 mL of fuel around 11.8% ethanol (roughly E12), not E20. If my calculations are correct, then I have a genuine question: has the ethanol content quietly been reduced from E20 to E12 temporarily because of a widespread backlash? or is there another explanation for these results? Either way, this also shows how readily ethanol attracts water and what moisture inside a fuel tank can potentially do over time. Happy to be corrected if my calculations or the test method are wrong!! ☺️

Did a simple ethanol check myself yesterday! Watch it till the end! Took 170 mL of E20 petrol, added 20 mL of water, shook it well, and after the layers separated, the water/ethanol layer measured 40 mL. That suggests roughly 20 mL of ethanol in 170 mL of fuel around 11.8% ethanol (roughly E12), not E20. If my calculations are correct, then I have a genuine question: has the ethanol content quietly been reduced from E20 to E12 temporarily because of a widespread backlash? or is there another explanation for these results? Either way, this also shows how readily ethanol attracts water and what moisture inside a fuel tank can potentially do over time. Happy to be corrected if my calculations or the test method are wrong!! ☺️

Rattan Dhillon

417,712 次观看 • 19 天前

ELON: THE ENTIRE GOV RETIREMENT PROCESS WAS STILL DONE BY PAPER — LIKE IN THE 1950S “The retirement process is all by paper, literally, with people carrying paper in Manila envelopes into this gigantic mine. The reason we discovered it was we were saying, like, well, let's encourage voluntary retirement. They said, well, the most they could do is 8,000 a month. And even under normal circumstances, it can take six to nine months just to have your time and paperwork processed. And they often get the calculations wrong." Source: DOGE interview on Fox News, March 2025

ELON: THE ENTIRE GOV RETIREMENT PROCESS WAS STILL DONE BY PAPER — LIKE IN THE 1950S “The retirement process is all by paper, literally, with people carrying paper in Manila envelopes into this gigantic mine. The reason we discovered it was we were saying, like, well, let's encourage voluntary retirement. They said, well, the most they could do is 8,000 a month. And even under normal circumstances, it can take six to nine months just to have your time and paperwork processed. And they often get the calculations wrong." Source: DOGE interview on Fox News, March 2025

Mario Nawfal

100,564 次观看 • 1 年前

🚨 BREAKING ANALYSIS: Trump's Iran Gamble Could Cost Him Everything! 🚨 I warn: "If President Trump orders an attack on Iran and it goes poorly, he risks impeachment. If it goes disastrously wrong, he could even be removed from office—the first time in U.S. history." "Trump has been doing whatever he wants without consequences... But if that changes with a failed Iran strike, the political calculations will shift dramatically." "The administration isn't even contemplating this risk. They should—before pulling the trigger." Don't miss this urgent deep dive on U.S. foreign policy risks! 🔥 Watch the full clip NOW: [ #TrumpIranCrisis 👉 #Trump #IranWar #ImpeachmentRisk #USPolitics #DanielDavisDeepDive #ForeignPolicy #GOPSenate #NationalSecurity

🚨 BREAKING ANALYSIS: Trump's Iran Gamble Could Cost Him Everything! 🚨 I warn: "If President Trump orders an attack on Iran and it goes poorly, he risks impeachment. If it goes disastrously wrong, he could even be removed from office—the first time in U.S. history." "Trump has been doing whatever he wants without consequences... But if that changes with a failed Iran strike, the political calculations will shift dramatically." "The administration isn't even contemplating this risk. They should—before pulling the trigger." Don't miss this urgent deep dive on U.S. foreign policy risks! 🔥 Watch the full clip NOW: [ #TrumpIranCrisis 👉 #Trump #IranWar #ImpeachmentRisk #USPolitics #DanielDavisDeepDive #ForeignPolicy #GOPSenate #NationalSecurity

Daniel Davis Deep Dive

70,047 次观看 • 5 个月前

The reality is that AI is so revolutionary and so disruptive that it’s very hard to say for sure whether superscalers are currently priced accurately in the markets. But what will be even more impactful and is not adequately priced in is the effect AI is going to have on applications of it on company earnings, efficiencies, and the like. I’m often asked whether these future productivity improvements will convert to the profits and incomes needed to service the debt well. I’ve done the calculations, measuring it against other productivity miracles, and I think it’s very unlikely — though of course, I could be wrong. As an investor, if you think that will happen, I suggest that you skew your portfolio accordingly. Master Investor Wilfred Frost

The reality is that AI is so revolutionary and so disruptive that it’s very hard to say for sure whether superscalers are currently priced accurately in the markets. But what will be even more impactful and is not adequately priced in is the effect AI is going to have on applications of it on company earnings, efficiencies, and the like. I’m often asked whether these future productivity improvements will convert to the profits and incomes needed to service the debt well. I’ve done the calculations, measuring it against other productivity miracles, and I think it’s very unlikely — though of course, I could be wrong. As an investor, if you think that will happen, I suggest that you skew your portfolio accordingly. Master Investor Wilfred Frost

Ray Dalio

138,334 次观看 • 10 个月前

Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud slams Iran: They continue to attack their neighbors, their brothers, while calling for Islamic solidarity. How can they expect solidarity and support while attacking Islamic countries, harming their interests, and targeting their civilians? How can they call for diplomatic solutions while attacking nations that have no connection to the ongoing conflict? If Iran believes that the Gulf states are incapable of resilience or response, then its calculations are wrong. Political responses are available, and non-political responses are also on the table. Iran must review its intentions. If it is sincere in extending a hand of friendship and brotherhood, it must first uphold the principles of Islam, which do not allow a true Muslim to attack their neighbors—especially Muslim neighbors, civilians, and the interests of Muslim nations. It appears that Iran has not taken these considerations into account, and all of this comes at a price.

Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud slams Iran: They continue to attack their neighbors, their brothers, while calling for Islamic solidarity. How can they expect solidarity and support while attacking Islamic countries, harming their interests, and targeting their civilians? How can they call for diplomatic solutions while attacking nations that have no connection to the ongoing conflict? If Iran believes that the Gulf states are incapable of resilience or response, then its calculations are wrong. Political responses are available, and non-political responses are also on the table. Iran must review its intentions. If it is sincere in extending a hand of friendship and brotherhood, it must first uphold the principles of Islam, which do not allow a true Muslim to attack their neighbors—especially Muslim neighbors, civilians, and the interests of Muslim nations. It appears that Iran has not taken these considerations into account, and all of this comes at a price.

Clash Report

1,080,775 次观看 • 4 个月前

The self-declared, self-proclaimed, self-styled Chanakya of Indian politics assured his party and his Sahib that he was going to secure a two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha on the delimitation bill. A total of 528 MPs were present and voted on the 17th of April. According to the Constitution, to pass that amendment, two-thirds of those present and voting were required. So, with 528 members present, they needed 352 votes. He got 298. So, obviously, all their calculations were wrong. Their assumptions were wrong. They did not anticipate this level of opposition, unity, and solidarity. They were humiliated, and it was visible on the faces of the Home Minister and the Prime Minister. Now they want to get the delimitation bill passed. So first, they did Operation Lotus in West Bengal, and then Operation Tiger in Maharashtra. The delimitation bill was passed on the 23rd September, 2023, but it was notified on the night of April 16, 2026. The real reason for '400 Paar' was that they could redo the Constitution or have a new Constitution to ensure their age-old bugbear, which is reservation. Their game plan is that this monsoon session should be dominated by delimitation. But we will not allow that because there is the NEET issue, the CBSE issue, and the Ram Trust issue, which are far more serious issues affecting Indian society than the delimitation issue. : Congress General Secretary (Communications) Shri Jairam Ramesh

The self-declared, self-proclaimed, self-styled Chanakya of Indian politics assured his party and his Sahib that he was going to secure a two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha on the delimitation bill. A total of 528 MPs were present and voted on the 17th of April. According to the Constitution, to pass that amendment, two-thirds of those present and voting were required. So, with 528 members present, they needed 352 votes. He got 298. So, obviously, all their calculations were wrong. Their assumptions were wrong. They did not anticipate this level of opposition, unity, and solidarity. They were humiliated, and it was visible on the faces of the Home Minister and the Prime Minister. Now they want to get the delimitation bill passed. So first, they did Operation Lotus in West Bengal, and then Operation Tiger in Maharashtra. The delimitation bill was passed on the 23rd September, 2023, but it was notified on the night of April 16, 2026. The real reason for '400 Paar' was that they could redo the Constitution or have a new Constitution to ensure their age-old bugbear, which is reservation. Their game plan is that this monsoon session should be dominated by delimitation. But we will not allow that because there is the NEET issue, the CBSE issue, and the Ram Trust issue, which are far more serious issues affecting Indian society than the delimitation issue. : Congress General Secretary (Communications) Shri Jairam Ramesh

Congress

47,968 次观看 • 1 个月前

Just finished Gad Saad’s Suicidal Empathy and it hit me like a truck .this is exactly what’s wrong with the West . Remember that scene in the 2004 movie I, Robot (inspired by Isaac Asimov) ? Car plunges into the river. A man and a 12-year-old girl are drowning. The robot runs cold calculations: the man has a 45% chance of survival, the little girl only 11%. So it saves the man and lets the girl die. Will Smith’s character is disgusted. “You let her die?!” The robot replies without a shred of emotion: “I calculated the odds.” That robot was more sane than modern Western civilization. Today we’ve gone full suicidal empathy - we don’t calculate odds at all. We’re drowning in deranged, misplaced compassion. We protect criminals over victims, invaders over citizens, feelings over facts, and the 11% case every single fucking time. We’d rather watch our entire society sink than be accused of not being “kind” enough. The robot wasn’t the monster. We are. We’ve replaced survival instinct with performative, self-destructive kindness • and we’re proudly marching toward civilizational suicide while patting ourselves on the back for being so virtuous. A society that cares more about infinite empathy than its own survival is a society that deserves to die. And we’re sprinting toward exactly that. Read the book. Wake up.

Just finished Gad Saad’s Suicidal Empathy and it hit me like a truck .this is exactly what’s wrong with the West . Remember that scene in the 2004 movie I, Robot (inspired by Isaac Asimov) ? Car plunges into the river. A man and a 12-year-old girl are drowning. The robot runs cold calculations: the man has a 45% chance of survival, the little girl only 11%. So it saves the man and lets the girl die. Will Smith’s character is disgusted. “You let her die?!” The robot replies without a shred of emotion: “I calculated the odds.” That robot was more sane than modern Western civilization. Today we’ve gone full suicidal empathy - we don’t calculate odds at all. We’re drowning in deranged, misplaced compassion. We protect criminals over victims, invaders over citizens, feelings over facts, and the 11% case every single fucking time. We’d rather watch our entire society sink than be accused of not being “kind” enough. The robot wasn’t the monster. We are. We’ve replaced survival instinct with performative, self-destructive kindness • and we’re proudly marching toward civilizational suicide while patting ourselves on the back for being so virtuous. A society that cares more about infinite empathy than its own survival is a society that deserves to die. And we’re sprinting toward exactly that. Read the book. Wake up.

RUnews

24,505 次观看 • 2 个月前

A creature smaller than your fingernail just solved the hardest problem in evolutionary biology. This male peacock spider weighs less than a grain of rice. His brain contains roughly 100,000 neurons. For comparison, a honeybee has a million. Yet this tiny spider executes a courtship routine so intricate that human choreographers study his movements. He raises his abdomen like a neon billboard, revealing patterns that shift from electric blue to golden yellow. His front legs wave in perfect synchronization while his third pair of legs vibrate at frequencies that create substrate tremors only the female can detect. The entire sequence lasts exactly 47 minutes and involves over 300 distinct movements performed in precise order. Get one step wrong and she eats him alive. Sexual selection created the cruelest performance review in nature. The female peacock spider doesn't just judge his dance. She measures his genetic fitness, his neurological precision, and his ability to execute complex motor functions under lethal pressure. Every movement broadcasts information about his DNA quality, his developmental stability, and his cognitive processing speed. What breaks your brain is the computational load. This spider must simultaneously control eight legs in different patterns, monitor her behavioral cues, adjust his display intensity in real time, and maintain perfect rhythm across nearly an hour of continuous performance. His nervous system is processing sensory input, motor output, and decision trees at a speed that would challenge supercomputers. Evolution built a microscopic performer capable of calculations that required millions of years to perfect, all contained in a brain you could barely see without magnification. The universe keeps hiding its most sophisticated engineering in the smallest packages.

A creature smaller than your fingernail just solved the hardest problem in evolutionary biology. This male peacock spider weighs less than a grain of rice. His brain contains roughly 100,000 neurons. For comparison, a honeybee has a million. Yet this tiny spider executes a courtship routine so intricate that human choreographers study his movements. He raises his abdomen like a neon billboard, revealing patterns that shift from electric blue to golden yellow. His front legs wave in perfect synchronization while his third pair of legs vibrate at frequencies that create substrate tremors only the female can detect. The entire sequence lasts exactly 47 minutes and involves over 300 distinct movements performed in precise order. Get one step wrong and she eats him alive. Sexual selection created the cruelest performance review in nature. The female peacock spider doesn't just judge his dance. She measures his genetic fitness, his neurological precision, and his ability to execute complex motor functions under lethal pressure. Every movement broadcasts information about his DNA quality, his developmental stability, and his cognitive processing speed. What breaks your brain is the computational load. This spider must simultaneously control eight legs in different patterns, monitor her behavioral cues, adjust his display intensity in real time, and maintain perfect rhythm across nearly an hour of continuous performance. His nervous system is processing sensory input, motor output, and decision trees at a speed that would challenge supercomputers. Evolution built a microscopic performer capable of calculations that required millions of years to perfect, all contained in a brain you could barely see without magnification. The universe keeps hiding its most sophisticated engineering in the smallest packages.

The Curious Tales

342,481 次观看 • 3 个月前

⚡️ 🇮🇷 BREAKING: “The enemy’s multi-layered defense systems were thrown into disarray, to the extent that their own defense systems targeted each other.” IRGC statement on the Eighth Wave of Operation “True Promise 3” - Statement No. 6: "We hereby inform the noble nation of Iran that moments ago, a new and more powerful wave of missile attacks by the IRGC Aerospace Force has begun, stronger and more intense than before. In this operation, the command and control systems of the brutal zionist regime were disrupted using advanced methods and enhanced intelligence and technical capabilities — strengthened by martyrs Bagheri, Salami, Hajizadeh, and other martyrs of the IRGC Aerospace Force. The enemy’s multi-layered defense systems were thrown into disarray, to the extent that their own defense systems targeted each other. The innovations and capabilities used in this operation — despite full support from the U.S. and Western powers, and the regime’s access to the latest and most advanced defense technologies — led to the successful and maximum impact of the missiles on their intended targets in the occupied territories. Today, we are witnessing the fulfillment of the honest promises of Martyrs Bagheri, Salami, and Hajizadeh, who repeatedly stated that “True Promise 3” and future operations would be far more forceful, precise, and destructive than previous ones. This operation also proves that the assessments and calculations of the delusional and aggressive zionist and American enemies regarding Islamic Iran were completely wrong — and now, we must witness the collapse of the zionist occupying regime. Supporters of this criminal regime should also know that effective, targeted, and increasingly forceful operations against the vital centers of this fake regime will continue until its complete destruction."

⚡️ 🇮🇷 BREAKING: “The enemy’s multi-layered defense systems were thrown into disarray, to the extent that their own defense systems targeted each other.” IRGC statement on the Eighth Wave of Operation “True Promise 3” - Statement No. 6: "We hereby inform the noble nation of Iran that moments ago, a new and more powerful wave of missile attacks by the IRGC Aerospace Force has begun, stronger and more intense than before. In this operation, the command and control systems of the brutal zionist regime were disrupted using advanced methods and enhanced intelligence and technical capabilities — strengthened by martyrs Bagheri, Salami, Hajizadeh, and other martyrs of the IRGC Aerospace Force. The enemy’s multi-layered defense systems were thrown into disarray, to the extent that their own defense systems targeted each other. The innovations and capabilities used in this operation — despite full support from the U.S. and Western powers, and the regime’s access to the latest and most advanced defense technologies — led to the successful and maximum impact of the missiles on their intended targets in the occupied territories. Today, we are witnessing the fulfillment of the honest promises of Martyrs Bagheri, Salami, and Hajizadeh, who repeatedly stated that “True Promise 3” and future operations would be far more forceful, precise, and destructive than previous ones. This operation also proves that the assessments and calculations of the delusional and aggressive zionist and American enemies regarding Islamic Iran were completely wrong — and now, we must witness the collapse of the zionist occupying regime. Supporters of this criminal regime should also know that effective, targeted, and increasingly forceful operations against the vital centers of this fake regime will continue until its complete destruction."

Suppressed News.

45,118 次观看 • 1 年前

Election Time ⏲️ West Bengal Astrological Prediction.. Hello everyone, I must share one thing before sharing my analysis on this election.. The amount of request from you all for my prediction on this election has been even higher than 2024 election such is everyone curiosity so high.. Now as a Vedic Astrologer practising for almost 15 years now.. And someone who has been very active with election predictions with great accuracy also in past.. I can humbly accept this has been the toughest election to predict for me as an astrologer.. And the biggest reason for that is.. Didi Mamata Banerjee birth details are a complete mystery.. And when she is the centre player for this election.. It becomes so difficult and handicapped to do analysis without her proper details.. That's why such a delay from my side in posting my owm analysis.. So now whatever data I could get for her and rest based on TMC ,BJP ,Modi ji and other top leader data I have got, I have done a very detailed analysis as much as I could do.. So as per my astrological analysis BJP has the best chance to win 🏆 Bengal this time .. Its a very close well fought election astrologically also its clear.. But as per my analysis this time BJP has a slight edge over TMC/Mamata.. In all probability they should cross the majority mark or reach very close to it.. And end this black rule of TMC in bengal.. Rest just a humble reminder.. I am only a human and a very humble student practicing this great Jyotish vidhya given to us by Mahadev.. Yes I have been very accurate in last 5-6 years with my predictions commanding accuracy about 85-90 percent.. Still I can wrong and make mistakes in my calculations.. If that happens .. Its will be my lacking not the Science of Jyotish Vidhya .. Rest lets see now .. Who finally wins Bengal 🏆 What Mahadev decides finally.. That only Will Happen in the end.. Thank you .. Jai Maa Kali .. Har Har Mahadev

Election Time ⏲️ West Bengal Astrological Prediction.. Hello everyone, I must share one thing before sharing my analysis on this election.. The amount of request from you all for my prediction on this election has been even higher than 2024 election such is everyone curiosity so high.. Now as a Vedic Astrologer practising for almost 15 years now.. And someone who has been very active with election predictions with great accuracy also in past.. I can humbly accept this has been the toughest election to predict for me as an astrologer.. And the biggest reason for that is.. Didi Mamata Banerjee birth details are a complete mystery.. And when she is the centre player for this election.. It becomes so difficult and handicapped to do analysis without her proper details.. That's why such a delay from my side in posting my owm analysis.. So now whatever data I could get for her and rest based on TMC ,BJP ,Modi ji and other top leader data I have got, I have done a very detailed analysis as much as I could do.. So as per my astrological analysis BJP has the best chance to win 🏆 Bengal this time .. Its a very close well fought election astrologically also its clear.. But as per my analysis this time BJP has a slight edge over TMC/Mamata.. In all probability they should cross the majority mark or reach very close to it.. And end this black rule of TMC in bengal.. Rest just a humble reminder.. I am only a human and a very humble student practicing this great Jyotish vidhya given to us by Mahadev.. Yes I have been very accurate in last 5-6 years with my predictions commanding accuracy about 85-90 percent.. Still I can wrong and make mistakes in my calculations.. If that happens .. Its will be my lacking not the Science of Jyotish Vidhya .. Rest lets see now .. Who finally wins Bengal 🏆 What Mahadev decides finally.. That only Will Happen in the end.. Thank you .. Jai Maa Kali .. Har Har Mahadev

AstroCounselKK 🇮🇳

521,637 次观看 • 3 个月前

Marilyn Gladu said floor crossers should face voters — now she won't If you believe something strongly enough to say it out loud… you’d better be ready to live by it. Marilyn Gladu set the standard herself. She said the whole point of being a member of Parliament “is to represent your constituents.” That switching sides in the House of Commons isn't “representing what you’re supposed to be there to represent.” She even suggested that voters who elected MPs for a certain party “deserve a chance to have a redo” if their supposed representative crosses the floor. So let’s apply it to her. Gladu was elected as a Conservative in Sarnia—Lambton. She was no fence-sitter; she was one of the most reliably Conservative MPs in the country. She backed the truckers and the Freedom Convoy. She opposed Justin Trudeau's use of the Emergencies Act. She was against forced vaccination and lockdowns. She even pushed to reopen the abortion debate. She was openly pro-life in a Parliament where that’s increasingly rare. Now, she’s a Liberal? A party that has made it policy to block pro-life candidates from even running under its banner. That’s not a small drifting shift. That’s a total reversal on one of the clearest lines in Canadian politics. She crossed after opposing Liberal overreach into civil liberties just weeks ago. And voters are supposed to just… accept that? Without an explanation? Without a vote? Well, if you want to send a message, go to our petition page to sign, and while you're there, donate to help us send the billboard truck to her riding as we did to that other floor crosser, Matt Jeneroux. Marilyn Gladu has left us to guess what changed. Her values? Her priorities? Or just her political calculations? Because this wasn’t forced on her. She chose it. Her seat wasn't in jeopardy. And if she believes this is the right move, then she already told us what comes next. A redo. A byelection where she stands in front of her constituents and explains why she abandoned the platform they elected her on and why they should trust her now as a Liberal. Let her defend joining a party that doesn’t allow candidates who share her past views to run. Let her explain that to the people who voted for her because of those views. And then let them decide. If she’s right, she wins. If she’s wrong, she goes home. That’s the test she set. Now, she should take it. REPORT by Sheila Gunn Reid:

Marilyn Gladu said floor crossers should face voters — now she won't If you believe something strongly enough to say it out loud… you’d better be ready to live by it. Marilyn Gladu set the standard herself. She said the whole point of being a member of Parliament “is to represent your constituents.” That switching sides in the House of Commons isn't “representing what you’re supposed to be there to represent.” She even suggested that voters who elected MPs for a certain party “deserve a chance to have a redo” if their supposed representative crosses the floor. So let’s apply it to her. Gladu was elected as a Conservative in Sarnia—Lambton. She was no fence-sitter; she was one of the most reliably Conservative MPs in the country. She backed the truckers and the Freedom Convoy. She opposed Justin Trudeau's use of the Emergencies Act. She was against forced vaccination and lockdowns. She even pushed to reopen the abortion debate. She was openly pro-life in a Parliament where that’s increasingly rare. Now, she’s a Liberal? A party that has made it policy to block pro-life candidates from even running under its banner. That’s not a small drifting shift. That’s a total reversal on one of the clearest lines in Canadian politics. She crossed after opposing Liberal overreach into civil liberties just weeks ago. And voters are supposed to just… accept that? Without an explanation? Without a vote? Well, if you want to send a message, go to our petition page to sign, and while you're there, donate to help us send the billboard truck to her riding as we did to that other floor crosser, Matt Jeneroux. Marilyn Gladu has left us to guess what changed. Her values? Her priorities? Or just her political calculations? Because this wasn’t forced on her. She chose it. Her seat wasn't in jeopardy. And if she believes this is the right move, then she already told us what comes next. A redo. A byelection where she stands in front of her constituents and explains why she abandoned the platform they elected her on and why they should trust her now as a Liberal. Let her defend joining a party that doesn’t allow candidates who share her past views to run. Let her explain that to the people who voted for her because of those views. And then let them decide. If she’s right, she wins. If she’s wrong, she goes home. That’s the test she set. Now, she should take it. REPORT by Sheila Gunn Reid:

Rebel News

16,322 次观看 • 3 个月前

In 2002, Elon Musk flew to Moscow three times to buy a refurbished missile. He couldn't close the deal. On the flight home, he asked himself: "When's the last time you bought something Russian that wasn't vodka?" He started SpaceX instead. 1 year later, he stood in front of Stanford students and spent 45 minutes explaining everything he'd learned about building companies: On starting Zip2: This was 1995. Most VCs on Sand Hill Road hadn't even heard of the internet. "I thought it would be a pretty huge thing. It was one of those things that only came along once in a very long while." He got a deferment from Stanford to start the company. "When I talked to my professor and told him this, he said, 'Well, I don't think you'll be coming back.' That was the last conversation I had with him." The problem: he had no money. "I couldn't afford a place to stay and an office. So I rented an office instead, because I got a cheaper office than I could get a place to stay." "I slept on the futon and showered at the YMCA on Page Mill and El Camino." "I was in the best shape I've ever been. Go to shower, work out, and you're good to go." There was an ISP on the floor below them. "We drilled a hole through the floor and connected a null modem cable. That gave us our internet connectivity for like 100 bucks a month." "We had an absurdly tiny burn rate. And we also had a really tiny revenue stream. But we actually had more revenue than we had expenses." They sold Zip2 to Compaq in early 1999 for over $300 million. "In cash. That's a currency I highly recommend." On starting PayPal: "I didn't really take any time off." He was looking for what remained in the internet. Financial services hadn't seen much innovation. "When you think about it, money is low bandwidth. You don't need some big infrastructure improvement. It's really just an entry in a database." They built a platform that combined banking, brokerage, and insurance in one place. That took enormous effort. Then they added a little feature that took one day: the ability to email money from one customer to another. "Whenever we demonstrated these two sets of features, we'd say, 'Look how you can see your bank statement and your mutual funds and insurance, all on one page. Look how convenient that is.'" "And people would go, 'Ho hum.'" "Then we'd say, 'And by the way, we have this feature where you can enter somebody's email address and transfer funds.'" "And they'd go, 'Wow.'" "So we focused the company's business on email payments." On viral growth: "PayPal is really a perfect case example of viral marketing." "One customer would essentially act as a salesperson for you. They would send money to a friend and essentially recruit that friend into the network." "So you had this exponential growth. The more customers you had, the faster it grew." "It was like bacteria in a Petri dish. It just goes like this S-curve." The results: "I ran PayPal for about the first two years of its existence. We launched after year one. By the end of year two, we had a million customers." "We didn't have a sales force. We didn't have a VP of sales. We didn't have a VP of marketing. And we didn't spend any money on advertising." On why product matters: "The essence of viral marketing is: do you have something where one customer is going to sell another customer without you having to do anything?" "Product matters incredibly. Because if you're going to recommend something to somebody, you've got to really love the product experience. Otherwise you're not going to recommend it." "You don't want to burn your friend." On company culture: "We had a pretty flat hierarchy. Everybody had a roughly similar cube. Anyone could talk to anyone." "We had a philosophy of best idea wins. As opposed to the person proposing the idea winning because they are who they are." "Even though there were times when I thought that should have been the way to go." On decision-making: "If there were two paths and one wasn't obviously better than the other, rather than spend a lot of time trying to figure out which one was slightly better, we would just pick one and do it." "Sometimes we'd be wrong and pick the suboptimal path. But often it's better to pick a path and do it than to just vacillate endlessly on a choice." On focus: "We didn't worry too much about intellectual property, paperwork, legal stuff." "We were very focused on building the best product we possibly could." "We were incredibly obsessive about how to build something that is really going to be the best possible customer experience." "That was a far more effective selling tool than having a giant sales force or thinking of marketing gimmicks or 12-step processes." On why he started SpaceX: "I was trying to figure out why we had not made more progress since Apollo." "In the 60s, we went from basically nothing to putting people on the moon. Yet in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, we've kind of gone sideways." "The computer you could have bought in the early 70s would have filled this room and had less computing power than your cell phone. Just about every sector of technology has improved. Why has this not improved?" He thought maybe public support was the problem. So he planned a privately funded Mars mission: put plants growing on Mars for $15-20 million. But the cheapest US rocket was $50 million. So he flew to Moscow. Three trips. Couldn't close the deal. "When I got back from the third trip, I thought: why is it the Russians can build these low-cost launch vehicles? It's not like we drive Russian cars, fly Russian planes, or have Russian kitchen appliances." "When's the last time you bought something Russian that wasn't vodka?" "I think the US is a pretty competitive place. We should be able to build a cost-efficient launch vehicle." On why rockets are expensive: "The energy and velocity required to get into orbit is so substantial that you have almost no margin to play with." "A launch vehicle will get about 2% of its liftoff mass to orbit." "If you're wrong by 2%, you're not going to get anything to orbit. It'll come crashing down in the Pacific somewhere." "That means all of your calculations have to be right. If you miscalculate something, it blows up." On how SpaceX got costs down: Their rocket: $6 million. Nearest competitor: $25 million for less capability. "There's no silver bullet. It's been really hundreds of small innovations and improvements." "We've done improvements in the propulsion system, the structure, the avionics, and the launch operations." "Our overhead in a 30-person company is an order of magnitude less than Lockheed or Boeing. Just for starters." "Every decision we've made has been with consideration to simplicity. Because simplicity both improves reliability and reduces cost." "If you've got fewer components, that's fewer components to go wrong and fewer components to buy." On being an entrepreneur: "I think really an obsessive nature with respect to the quality of the product is very important." "Being obsessive-compulsive is a good thing in this context." "Really liking what you do is important. If you don't like it, life is too short." "If you like what you're doing, you think about it even when you're not working. Your mind is drawn to it." "If you don't like it, you just really can't make it work." On parallelization: "Try not to serialize dependencies. Put as many elements in parallel as possible." "A lot of things have a gestation period. There's really nothing you can do to accelerate that gestation period." "If you can have all those things gestating in parallel, that is one way to substantially accelerate your timeline." "People tend to serialize things too much." On space as a business: Someone asked if SpaceX was a good first company to start. "No. I would not recommend it." "This is advanced entrepreneuring." "You know how many people have said: the fastest way to make a small fortune in the aerospace industry is to start with a large one." This 45 minute Stanford lecture will teach you more about building companies than every startup book combined. Bookmark & give it 45 minutes today, no matter what.

In 2002, Elon Musk flew to Moscow three times to buy a refurbished missile. He couldn't close the deal. On the flight home, he asked himself: "When's the last time you bought something Russian that wasn't vodka?" He started SpaceX instead. 1 year later, he stood in front of Stanford students and spent 45 minutes explaining everything he'd learned about building companies: On starting Zip2: This was 1995. Most VCs on Sand Hill Road hadn't even heard of the internet. "I thought it would be a pretty huge thing. It was one of those things that only came along once in a very long while." He got a deferment from Stanford to start the company. "When I talked to my professor and told him this, he said, 'Well, I don't think you'll be coming back.' That was the last conversation I had with him." The problem: he had no money. "I couldn't afford a place to stay and an office. So I rented an office instead, because I got a cheaper office than I could get a place to stay." "I slept on the futon and showered at the YMCA on Page Mill and El Camino." "I was in the best shape I've ever been. Go to shower, work out, and you're good to go." There was an ISP on the floor below them. "We drilled a hole through the floor and connected a null modem cable. That gave us our internet connectivity for like 100 bucks a month." "We had an absurdly tiny burn rate. And we also had a really tiny revenue stream. But we actually had more revenue than we had expenses." They sold Zip2 to Compaq in early 1999 for over $300 million. "In cash. That's a currency I highly recommend." On starting PayPal: "I didn't really take any time off." He was looking for what remained in the internet. Financial services hadn't seen much innovation. "When you think about it, money is low bandwidth. You don't need some big infrastructure improvement. It's really just an entry in a database." They built a platform that combined banking, brokerage, and insurance in one place. That took enormous effort. Then they added a little feature that took one day: the ability to email money from one customer to another. "Whenever we demonstrated these two sets of features, we'd say, 'Look how you can see your bank statement and your mutual funds and insurance, all on one page. Look how convenient that is.'" "And people would go, 'Ho hum.'" "Then we'd say, 'And by the way, we have this feature where you can enter somebody's email address and transfer funds.'" "And they'd go, 'Wow.'" "So we focused the company's business on email payments." On viral growth: "PayPal is really a perfect case example of viral marketing." "One customer would essentially act as a salesperson for you. They would send money to a friend and essentially recruit that friend into the network." "So you had this exponential growth. The more customers you had, the faster it grew." "It was like bacteria in a Petri dish. It just goes like this S-curve." The results: "I ran PayPal for about the first two years of its existence. We launched after year one. By the end of year two, we had a million customers." "We didn't have a sales force. We didn't have a VP of sales. We didn't have a VP of marketing. And we didn't spend any money on advertising." On why product matters: "The essence of viral marketing is: do you have something where one customer is going to sell another customer without you having to do anything?" "Product matters incredibly. Because if you're going to recommend something to somebody, you've got to really love the product experience. Otherwise you're not going to recommend it." "You don't want to burn your friend." On company culture: "We had a pretty flat hierarchy. Everybody had a roughly similar cube. Anyone could talk to anyone." "We had a philosophy of best idea wins. As opposed to the person proposing the idea winning because they are who they are." "Even though there were times when I thought that should have been the way to go." On decision-making: "If there were two paths and one wasn't obviously better than the other, rather than spend a lot of time trying to figure out which one was slightly better, we would just pick one and do it." "Sometimes we'd be wrong and pick the suboptimal path. But often it's better to pick a path and do it than to just vacillate endlessly on a choice." On focus: "We didn't worry too much about intellectual property, paperwork, legal stuff." "We were very focused on building the best product we possibly could." "We were incredibly obsessive about how to build something that is really going to be the best possible customer experience." "That was a far more effective selling tool than having a giant sales force or thinking of marketing gimmicks or 12-step processes." On why he started SpaceX: "I was trying to figure out why we had not made more progress since Apollo." "In the 60s, we went from basically nothing to putting people on the moon. Yet in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, we've kind of gone sideways." "The computer you could have bought in the early 70s would have filled this room and had less computing power than your cell phone. Just about every sector of technology has improved. Why has this not improved?" He thought maybe public support was the problem. So he planned a privately funded Mars mission: put plants growing on Mars for $15-20 million. But the cheapest US rocket was $50 million. So he flew to Moscow. Three trips. Couldn't close the deal. "When I got back from the third trip, I thought: why is it the Russians can build these low-cost launch vehicles? It's not like we drive Russian cars, fly Russian planes, or have Russian kitchen appliances." "When's the last time you bought something Russian that wasn't vodka?" "I think the US is a pretty competitive place. We should be able to build a cost-efficient launch vehicle." On why rockets are expensive: "The energy and velocity required to get into orbit is so substantial that you have almost no margin to play with." "A launch vehicle will get about 2% of its liftoff mass to orbit." "If you're wrong by 2%, you're not going to get anything to orbit. It'll come crashing down in the Pacific somewhere." "That means all of your calculations have to be right. If you miscalculate something, it blows up." On how SpaceX got costs down: Their rocket: $6 million. Nearest competitor: $25 million for less capability. "There's no silver bullet. It's been really hundreds of small innovations and improvements." "We've done improvements in the propulsion system, the structure, the avionics, and the launch operations." "Our overhead in a 30-person company is an order of magnitude less than Lockheed or Boeing. Just for starters." "Every decision we've made has been with consideration to simplicity. Because simplicity both improves reliability and reduces cost." "If you've got fewer components, that's fewer components to go wrong and fewer components to buy." On being an entrepreneur: "I think really an obsessive nature with respect to the quality of the product is very important." "Being obsessive-compulsive is a good thing in this context." "Really liking what you do is important. If you don't like it, life is too short." "If you like what you're doing, you think about it even when you're not working. Your mind is drawn to it." "If you don't like it, you just really can't make it work." On parallelization: "Try not to serialize dependencies. Put as many elements in parallel as possible." "A lot of things have a gestation period. There's really nothing you can do to accelerate that gestation period." "If you can have all those things gestating in parallel, that is one way to substantially accelerate your timeline." "People tend to serialize things too much." On space as a business: Someone asked if SpaceX was a good first company to start. "No. I would not recommend it." "This is advanced entrepreneuring." "You know how many people have said: the fastest way to make a small fortune in the aerospace industry is to start with a large one." This 45 minute Stanford lecture will teach you more about building companies than every startup book combined. Bookmark & give it 45 minutes today, no matter what.

Jaynit

423,205 次观看 • 3 个月前

A study proved that $40 million was extracted from Polymarket in one year using a single mathematical formula I found a wallet that is using it right now on Iran war markets and made $1.4M in one week. Most people on Polymarket try to predict the future. Will there be a war. Who will win the election. What will happen next. I spent months doing the same thing. Reading news. Watching debates. Building my little models of what I thought should happen. And losing money. Not because I was wrong about events. Because I was wrong about the game itself. The game is not about predictions. And the wallet I'm about to show you is living proof. Three weeks ago I pulled the full trade history of this wallet: What I saw at first didn't make sense. He was opening the same market more than 30 times. US strikes Iran by January 11. US strikes Iran by January 12. January 13. January 14. January 15. January 16. January 17. The same event. Different dates. Over and over. First thought: this person is obsessed with Iran. Second thought: this person doesn't care about Iran at all. Here's what he's actually doing. Polymarket creates separate markets for the same event with different deadlines. Will the US strike Iran by March. By April. By June. These are not independent questions. If the strike happens in March then April and June automatically resolve to YES as well. But Polymarket prices each market separately. And the crowd prices them emotionally. Fear spikes on Tuesday night because someone tweeted something. One market jumps. The others lag behind. For a few minutes and sometimes hours prices on related markets stop converging. When you buy NO across multiple dates and the total cost is 94 cents and the guaranteed payout is $1 regardless of what happens you're not betting. You're collecting a 6% return on mathematical inevitability. That's the entire strategy. He buys dollars for 94 cents. I checked his numbers. On the Iran series alone he pulled $247,000 in realized profit across seven markets with different dates. Average purchase price of NO positions from 72 to 95 cents. Each one resolved at $1. The biggest hit was the government shutdown market. $88,000 in profit. Same logic. Buy both sides when the total cost is less than a dollar. One side pays. Math does the rest. 85% of his capital is in political markets. Wars. Elections. Geopolitics. Not because he has strong geopolitical convictions. Because political markets on Polymarket are where the math breaks most often. Why political markets specifically? Because they generate the most emotion. When CNN runs breaking news about Iran at 11 PM thousands of people rush to buy YES on the nearest date. They overbid the price. They panic. They push one market out of line with the rest. That panic is his paycheck. And now the part that actually matters. I dug deeper into how this type of arbitrage works at scale and found a study that made everything click. A team analyzed every trade on Polymarket over 12 months. They found 17,218 market conditions. 41% of them had an exploitable pricing error. And the total profit extracted by arbitrageurs was $40 million. The top single wallet made $2 million using one algorithm. The Frank-Wolfe method. I'll explain without math because the concept is simple even if the calculations aren't. Imagine you walk into a store that sells lottery tickets for 7 different drawings. Each ticket is priced separately. The store doesn't coordinate prices between drawings. You notice that if you buy a certain combination of tickets across all 7 drawings the total cost is $94 but you're guaranteed to win exactly $100 no matter which drawing hits. You don't need to predict which drawing will win. You just need to notice that the store mispriced the tickets. Here's Frank-Wolfe in one sentence. It scans thousands of related markets simultaneously and finds combinations where the total price is less than the guaranteed payout. Then it calculates the exact amounts to buy on each side to maximize the spread. The reason a human can't do this manually is scale. There are hundreds of active markets on Polymarket. Many are connected by logic. If event A happens then event B must also happen. If candidate X wins state Y then the national result shifts. The number of possible combinations grows exponentially. While you're checking 10 markets by hand the algorithm has scanned 17,000. What anoin123 does is a manual version of this. He picks one cluster of related markets like the Iran date series and runs the logic in his head. Buy NO across seven dates. Total cost less than a dollar. Wait. Collect. The automated version does the same thing but across all markets on the platform simultaneously. My personal takeaway after three weeks of studying this. I spent months trying to be smarter than the crowd. Reading polls. Watching news. Forming opinions. And the whole time there was a category of traders who had zero opinions about anything. They just waited for the crowd to misprice related markets and collected the difference. The uncomfortable realization is that prediction markets are not actually about predictions for those who make the most money. They're about math. And the math breaks every day because people trade on emotions and the platform prices markets independently of each other. I don't have the infrastructure to run Frank-Wolfe at scale. But I don't need to. Wallets like anoin123 do this in plain sight. Every trade on the blockchain. Every entry price. Every exit. Every timestamp. I stopped trying to predict events. I started watching wallets that make money regardless of what happens. The difference in my results is so stark it's uncomfortable to think about. If you want to understand the full math behind this the study is publicly available. Search for Arbitrage in Prediction Markets on arXiv. But the short version is this. Every time the crowd panics about a war or an election and pushes one market out of line with its related markets someone on the other side quietly buys dollars for 94 cents. The question is not whether they'll strike Iran. The question is whether you noticed that seven markets about the same event are priced as if they have nothing to do with each other. That gap is where the money lives.

A study proved that $40 million was extracted from Polymarket in one year using a single mathematical formula I found a wallet that is using it right now on Iran war markets and made $1.4M in one week. Most people on Polymarket try to predict the future. Will there be a war. Who will win the election. What will happen next. I spent months doing the same thing. Reading news. Watching debates. Building my little models of what I thought should happen. And losing money. Not because I was wrong about events. Because I was wrong about the game itself. The game is not about predictions. And the wallet I'm about to show you is living proof. Three weeks ago I pulled the full trade history of this wallet: What I saw at first didn't make sense. He was opening the same market more than 30 times. US strikes Iran by January 11. US strikes Iran by January 12. January 13. January 14. January 15. January 16. January 17. The same event. Different dates. Over and over. First thought: this person is obsessed with Iran. Second thought: this person doesn't care about Iran at all. Here's what he's actually doing. Polymarket creates separate markets for the same event with different deadlines. Will the US strike Iran by March. By April. By June. These are not independent questions. If the strike happens in March then April and June automatically resolve to YES as well. But Polymarket prices each market separately. And the crowd prices them emotionally. Fear spikes on Tuesday night because someone tweeted something. One market jumps. The others lag behind. For a few minutes and sometimes hours prices on related markets stop converging. When you buy NO across multiple dates and the total cost is 94 cents and the guaranteed payout is $1 regardless of what happens you're not betting. You're collecting a 6% return on mathematical inevitability. That's the entire strategy. He buys dollars for 94 cents. I checked his numbers. On the Iran series alone he pulled $247,000 in realized profit across seven markets with different dates. Average purchase price of NO positions from 72 to 95 cents. Each one resolved at $1. The biggest hit was the government shutdown market. $88,000 in profit. Same logic. Buy both sides when the total cost is less than a dollar. One side pays. Math does the rest. 85% of his capital is in political markets. Wars. Elections. Geopolitics. Not because he has strong geopolitical convictions. Because political markets on Polymarket are where the math breaks most often. Why political markets specifically? Because they generate the most emotion. When CNN runs breaking news about Iran at 11 PM thousands of people rush to buy YES on the nearest date. They overbid the price. They panic. They push one market out of line with the rest. That panic is his paycheck. And now the part that actually matters. I dug deeper into how this type of arbitrage works at scale and found a study that made everything click. A team analyzed every trade on Polymarket over 12 months. They found 17,218 market conditions. 41% of them had an exploitable pricing error. And the total profit extracted by arbitrageurs was $40 million. The top single wallet made $2 million using one algorithm. The Frank-Wolfe method. I'll explain without math because the concept is simple even if the calculations aren't. Imagine you walk into a store that sells lottery tickets for 7 different drawings. Each ticket is priced separately. The store doesn't coordinate prices between drawings. You notice that if you buy a certain combination of tickets across all 7 drawings the total cost is $94 but you're guaranteed to win exactly $100 no matter which drawing hits. You don't need to predict which drawing will win. You just need to notice that the store mispriced the tickets. Here's Frank-Wolfe in one sentence. It scans thousands of related markets simultaneously and finds combinations where the total price is less than the guaranteed payout. Then it calculates the exact amounts to buy on each side to maximize the spread. The reason a human can't do this manually is scale. There are hundreds of active markets on Polymarket. Many are connected by logic. If event A happens then event B must also happen. If candidate X wins state Y then the national result shifts. The number of possible combinations grows exponentially. While you're checking 10 markets by hand the algorithm has scanned 17,000. What anoin123 does is a manual version of this. He picks one cluster of related markets like the Iran date series and runs the logic in his head. Buy NO across seven dates. Total cost less than a dollar. Wait. Collect. The automated version does the same thing but across all markets on the platform simultaneously. My personal takeaway after three weeks of studying this. I spent months trying to be smarter than the crowd. Reading polls. Watching news. Forming opinions. And the whole time there was a category of traders who had zero opinions about anything. They just waited for the crowd to misprice related markets and collected the difference. The uncomfortable realization is that prediction markets are not actually about predictions for those who make the most money. They're about math. And the math breaks every day because people trade on emotions and the platform prices markets independently of each other. I don't have the infrastructure to run Frank-Wolfe at scale. But I don't need to. Wallets like anoin123 do this in plain sight. Every trade on the blockchain. Every entry price. Every exit. Every timestamp. I stopped trying to predict events. I started watching wallets that make money regardless of what happens. The difference in my results is so stark it's uncomfortable to think about. If you want to understand the full math behind this the study is publicly available. Search for Arbitrage in Prediction Markets on arXiv. But the short version is this. Every time the crowd panics about a war or an election and pushes one market out of line with its related markets someone on the other side quietly buys dollars for 94 cents. The question is not whether they'll strike Iran. The question is whether you noticed that seven markets about the same event are priced as if they have nothing to do with each other. That gap is where the money lives.

Blaze

31,373 次观看 • 5 个月前