Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

من حقك تعرف عند اختيارك "الدفع عبر فاتورة الهاتف"، لا يسمح بإتمام عملية الشراء إلا بموافقة صريحة من المنتفع. Stay Informed: When you choose mobile phone billing, a purchase may only be completed with the beneficiary's explicit consent.

865,037 просмотров • 1 месяц назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 10

Фото профиля Alhamdi
Alhamdi25 дней назад

شكرا يا عزيزي نطالبكم بتدخل ف التجديد التلقائيّ

Фото профиля راشد السعدي
راشد السعدي26 дней назад

للأسف هذه الخاصية استغلت كثير في طرق النصب والاحتيال. لذلك شركات الاتصال ربما هيه المستفيدة.

Фото профиля يحيى الحسني
يحيى الحسني17 дней назад

بنسبة للاشتراك في باقة من باقات الاتصال بدون رقم السري للمرة واحده ولم يصلنا أشعار التفعيل ؟؟

Фото профиля وماتوفيقي إلا بالله
وماتوفيقي إلا بالله19 дней назад

ياناس التجديد التلقائي هلكنا وانا اشتكي من شركات الاتصالات ياخي ما نتبهت للرسالة او كان مع اهلي ما نتبهوا الحين باغي اطلع قالوا لازم تدفع 17 ريال ليش ومن قالكم تجددوا أنا وقعت اتصلتوا بي ووافقت لاحول ولاقوة الا بالله

Фото профиля حمدان اليعقوبي 🇵🇸 🇴🇲
حمدان اليعقوبي 🇵🇸 🇴🇲17 дней назад

هل هذا ينطبق على اشتراك بعض الألعاب الوهمية التي يكون فيها الاشتراك بدون علم المتنفع والتي تظهر في نهاية الشهر بدون علمه وتقدر احيانا ب٧ و٨ ريال وعندما تسأل مركز الاتصال عن هذا الاشتراك يتم الرد علينا بانك دخلت على لعبه واشتركت فيها بدون اراده ولا علم الى الهيئة الموقره للمتابعة

Фото профиля MOHAMMED_007
MOHAMMED_00725 дней назад

عمان تل محققه المركز الاول في هذا الجانب ..

Фото профиля Waleed AL HASANl
Waleed AL HASANl25 дней назад

شكرا الأخ غالب

Фото профиля الزير سالم
الزير سالم20 дней назад

طاب يومكم، بكل خير

Фото профиля محمود الخــروصي 🇴🇲🇴🇲🇴🇲
محمود الخــروصي 🇴🇲🇴🇲🇴🇲15 дней назад

نحن دفعونا ولما أشتكينا ما حد رد علينا لا الشركة المزودة ولا هيئة الاتصال ....مانقول لا حسبنا الله ونعم الوكيل

Фото профиля Mazin Alharrasi
Mazin Alharrasi19 дней назад

وحش غالب👏🏻👏🏻

Похожие видео

🎤 #كي_لاننسى 🙏 هذا يوم لا يُنسى ، 2/11/2025 ، يوم هولوكوست الفاشر ، يوم اختلطت فيه رائحة الدم والجثث والحريق ودموع الثكالى والأيتام والحزن وقهر الرجال والفجيعة ، في ذلك التاريخ ، خرجت من البيت أجهش بالبكاء ، وزوجتي تلحق بي في فناء المنزل تسأل: "هل أصاب أهلك شيء؟" ظنّت أن هناك هاتف قد فجعني في أحد من أقاربي ، ووالله إني فُجعت بالفعل بأهلي في الفاشر ، التفتُ لها وأومأت لها بالهاتف ، وشاهدَت معي مقطع الطفل وأخته يبكون وهم بجانب أمهم المقتولة فبكت هي الاخرى ، واحسرتاه ، قلت: "نعم ، هم أهلنا وأصابتهم مصيبة" فأخذت أقلّب المساحات الصوتية أريد افرغ مابداخلي من غضب ، فوجدت الأخ أبوخالد العاصوف العاصوف 🇸🇦 في مساحته يُرعد غضباً على نفس الموضوع "الفاشر " ، فلم أتملّك نفسي وبكيت وأبكيت من في المساحة ، فشلت في الحديث من هول ما رأيت ! يا ويلك يا ظالم ! ماذا فعلت في #السودان؟ وفي أي وجه ستقابل ربك يا مجرم؟ الا لعنة الله عليك آناء الليل واطراف النهار الا اخزاك الله سائر اليوم والشهر والعام والعمر كله 🤲 #هولوكوست_الفاشر ✍️ #الدعم_السريع_منظمة_ارهابية 🎤 #NeverForget 🙏 This is a day that will not be forgotten, 2/11/2025, the day of the El Fasher Holocaust. A day when the smell of blood, bodies, fire, and tears of the bereaved, orphans, sorrow, and the anguish of men mixed together. On that date, I left my house bursting into tears. My wife followed me into the yard asking, "Did something happen to your family?" She thought a phone call had brought bad news about one of my relatives. By God, I was indeed hurt by what happened to my people in El Fasher. I turned to her and nodded towards the phone. She saw the video of the child and his sister crying next to their murdered mother and she cried too. Alas! I said, "Yes, they are our people and they were struck by a calamity." I started scrolling through voice spaces wanting to vent my anger. I found brother Abu Khalid Al-Asouf العاصوف 🇸🇦 in his space thundering with anger about the same topic, "El Fasher". I couldn't control myself and I cried, making others in the space cry too. I was speechless at the horror of what I saw! Woe to you, oppressor! What have you done in #Sudan? In what face will you meet your Lord, you criminal? May God's curse be upon you night and day, may He disgrace you forever! #ElFasherHolocaust #Yes #RapidSupportMilitiaIsATerroristOrganization ياسين سالم ،، كاتب وصحفي من #السعودية 🇸🇦 Yaseen Salem

ياسين سالم

36,953 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

من ساحة مستشفى الشفاء الذي شهد قتلا وتشريدا وحرقا… هذه الساحة ساحة الشهداء التي دُفن فيها العشرات… نعيش في وزارة الصحة الفلسطينية أسوأ الظروف في المستشفيات ومراكز الرعاية الأولية… نعاني شُحّا غير مسبوقا في الأدوية والمستلزمات بسبب استمرار إغلاق المعابر… يوجد 170000 جريح وكل جريح يحتاج في المتوسط 3 عمليات ما يعني أننا نحتاج لأكثر من 400000 عملية جراحية… إذا استمر إغلاق المعابر سيموت هؤلاء أمام أعيننا في ظل النقص الحاد وحتى عدم توفر الماء النظيف في المستشفيات… لا بد من فتح المعابر والتزام الاحتلال بما اتُّفق عليه وقد اتفق الوسطاء على إدخال 600 شاحنة بينها شاحنات أدوية وإمداد طبي لإنقاذ المستشفيات وإنشاء المراكز الطبية… على المجتمع الدولي أن يُلزم الاحتلال بفتح المعابر وإدخال الإمداد الطبي لإنقاذ مئات الآلاف من المرضى والمصابين… نتحدث عن شعب أُصيبت غزة فيه بمجاعة مُعلنة وتحتاج إلى إجراءات وتدخلات سريعة بإدخال مراكز تغذية للأطفال والأمهات وتوفير حمض الفوليك والحديد وسائر رعاية الأمومة والطفل… استلمنا 90 جثمانا طاهرا على دفعتين 45 و45 وننتظر دفعة ثالثة تقارب 30… المشاهدات الأولية تُظهر تعذيبا وتكبيلا وآثار جنازير دبابات ووجود جثامين مُشرَّحة تحتاج لتدقيق من لجان مختصة… لدينا تجربة سابقة تُظهر إفراغ مضامين بعض الجثامين من الأعضاء ووضع القطن والقماش وسُرقت قرنيات وكِلى وحتى كبد… لا نستطيع تأكيد أو نفي سرقة الأعضاء إلا بعد استكمال الإجراءات الروتينية عبر لجنة من القضاء العالي والنيابة العامة ووزارة الصحة. From the courtyard of al-Shifa Hospital, which witnessed killing, displacement, and burning… this courtyard is the martyrs’ square where dozens were buried… we at the Palestinian Ministry of Health are living through the worst conditions in hospitals and primary care centers… we are suffering an unprecedented shortage of medicines and supplies due to the continued closure of the crossings… there are 170000 wounded, and each needs on average 3 operations, meaning we require more than 400000 surgical procedures… if the crossings remain closed, these people will die before our eyes amid severe shortages and even the lack of clean water in hospitals… the crossings must be opened and the occupation must abide by what was agreed, and mediators agreed to allow in 600 trucks, including medicine and medical-supply trucks, to save hospitals and establish medical centers… the international community must compel the occupation to open the crossings and bring in medical supplies to save hundreds of thousands of patients and the injured… we are talking about a people for whom Gaza has been declared to be in famine and who need rapid measures and interventions by setting up nutrition centers for children and mothers and providing folic acid, iron, and all maternal and child care… we received 90 pure bodies in two batches, 45 and 45, and we are awaiting a third batch of about 30… initial observations show torture, shackling, the tracks of tank treads, and bodies that were autopsied, which require verification by specialized committees… we have prior experience showing that some bodies were emptied of organs and stuffed with cotton and fabric, and corneas, kidneys, and even a liver were stolen… we cannot confirm or deny organ theft until routine procedures are completed by a committee from the High Judiciary, the Public Prosecution, and the Ministry of Health.

Dr.Muneer Alboursh د.منيرالبرش

32,072 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

🚨 BREAKING NEWS 🚨 Extremely Alarming: What if EVERYTHING YOU were Taught was Designed to Enslave YOU from Birth. Two videos that Rip the Mask off the Most Sophisticated Control System Ever Built. This is Not theoretical. This is the Blueprint. The Only two Videos You Need to Understand why the World Feels broken. Watch them. Then Never See Reality the Same way Again. Full breakdown Below. Retweet if You Feel the veil Lifting. First video reveals the Secret Covenant. A chilling pact outlining how a hidden elite would Poison Minds, Bodies, and Souls to dominate the Most intelligent Species on Earth. They Admit The Plan: Divide us from our own Love, rewrite Biology, turn Education into Indoctrination. The pattern matches history too perfectly to ignore. How many of their predictions have already come true in Your lifetime? Second video delivers the spoken manifesto that hits like ice water. From age five they slot You into buildings that punish originality and reward obedience. They feed You only approved facts, test You until those facts become Your identity, then shame any deviation as dangerous. They flood Your screen with tragedy so fear becomes Your baseline. They sell You idols of fake perfection so You hate Your own reflection. Sound familiar yet? They convinced generations We are random cosmic accidents with no purpose. No Creator, No Destiny, just evolved apes chasing dopamine. Then "they" built addictive platforms that rank Your worth by follower count and likes. Self esteem reduced to a number. Comparison weaponized. Loneliness industrialized. Who benefits when an entire population feels worthless and alone? Now the most disturbing part... They push confusion about Your own body. Tell Children they Can become Happy by Permanently Altering the One Vessel Nature gave Them. Medicalize normal puberty. Silence dissent as hate. Create endless new categories to fracture society into smaller and smaller tribes that fight each other instead of the architects. Divide and conquer has never been more surgical. Think about the timeline... Compulsory schooling for 12 plus years. Daily news cycle of fear... Social Media engineered for Addiction. Entertainment that Glorifies Degeneracy and mocks Virtue. Pharmaceutical solutions for every emotion. All of it working in perfect harmony to keep you distracted, dependent, and disconnected from Your Own Soul. Coincidence? Or covenant? Here are the questions that should keep You awake tonight: If Love is the Most Powerful Force, why does the system teach You to fear and compete instead? Why is questioning the official narrative treated as mental illness? Who profits when You Never Feel enough? What Happens When an Entire Generation Wakes up at Once? Are You Ready to Find Out? This is Not about Left or Right... This is about Human versus machine like control. Bloodlines and Secret Societies may be involved. Central Banks, Media Conglomerates, and Tech Overlords certainly are. They turned the School into a Factory, the Television into a Hypnotist, and Your Phone into a Prison Guard. The Prison is Now in Your Pocket and You Pay Monthly For it. The Good News? Awareness is the First crack in their Foundation. Every person who sees this thread and watches those videos becomes a threat to the entire program. They fear Your awakening more than anything. That is why censorship is ramping up. That is why they label truth seekers as dangerous. Because once You remember who You really are, their game ends. Real solutions start with You... Turn off the fear feed. Teach Your Children Critical Thinking instead of Compliance. Reconnect with Nature, Silence, and Real Human Relationships. Question Everything. Seek the Source of real Love within Yourself. Build parallel Systems, Communities, and Knowledge that Cannot be Controlled. The Future Belongs to Those who Refuse to be Programmed. I am putting everything on the line to say this publicly. If You Feel the Resonance in Your chest Right Now, You were Never meant to be a Slave in their Matrix. You Were Meant to Be Free, Sovereign, and Powerful Beyond their Comprehension. Share This Thread with Everyone You Love. The Great Awakening is Not coming. It is Already Here. The Only Question Left... is: will You participate? Drop Your Biggest Realization Below. Tag Friends who Need to See this. Save this thread. The Most Dangerous thing to tyrants is an Informed, United, Loving Population. We Are Becoming that Population Right Now. The Choice is Yours. Choose Truth. Choose Freedom. Choose Love. What will You do Today to Break the Covenant over Your Life? Read through the Responses, engage Thoughtfully, ask Questions, Challenge ideas Respectfully, and Contribute to Meaningful, productive Discussion. Let me know what You think, and SHARE THIS so that Others May do the Same! Aaaand Before You Continue scrolling... Do Yourself a Favor. Hit That Follow Button on Noah B. Price. Your Future Self will thank You.

Noah B. Price

640,734 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

It’s Time to Shift Mindsets: Every Active Shooter Is a Potential Suicide Bomber Be wary of black puffer coats as they’re one of the easiest garments to conceal bombs inside, and Al-Qaeda has shown that repeatedly, including in their December 2023 video teasing their upcoming homeland plot. At least 10% of the attackers in the homeland plot are expected to be suicide bombers. That means you can’t treat an active shooter as “just” an active shooter anymore. You must assume he’s also a suicide bomber because that’s exactly how they designed it. Here are some basic SOPs for civilians and venue staff when a shooter may also be a suicide bomber: (1) Distance is survival: If a bomber is still mobile, the blast radius is the threat. Move away and create as much distance as possible: 30–50 feet minimum, 100+ if available. (2) Don’t rush to “help” the downed attacker: If the attacker drops, do not approach. Many vests use dead-man switches, pressure triggers, delayed chemical binaries, or can be remotely detonated by an overwatch. (3) Also, in the same vein, don’t dogpile an attacker: limit engagement to 1–3 responders to reduce the risk of additional casualties. Focus on controlling the attacker’s hands. The most critical element in any close-quarters fight is using firm, targeted restraint techniques to prevent detonation or access to a weapon. (4) Avoid chokepoints: Stairwells, elevators, and bottlenecks become kill zones in a blast. Keep moving toward open space and hard structure. (5) Expect secondary devices: Al-Qaeda doctrine routinely includes follow-on blasts. Treat abandoned bags, jackets, or dropped items as potential IEDs. (6) Clothing–behavior mismatch matters: Watch for heavy coats indoors or in warm climates, and for uneven weight distribution inside of clothing. Also, watch for attempts to evade placing items on belt scanners. (7) Choose hard cover, not concealment: Concrete, pillars, and engine blocks save lives. Drywall and furniture do not. (8) Communicate the right words: When calling 911, say: “Active shooter, possible suicide vest.” It triggers an immediate tactical shift in response. Law enforcement around the country has been preparing for this scenario, give them a leg up with concise reporting. (9) Control the flow. Push crowds away from the attacker, not toward him. Prevent panic surges toward gunfire as suicide bombers seek density. (10) After evacuation, don’t cluster. Most mass-casualty terrorist attacks anticipate crowds gathering outside. Move far and disperse; attackers often plan waves, and clustering makes you a target for a secondary strike. (11) Bombs may contain caustic chemicals. Stay clear of the area until a full HAZMAT assessment is completed. If you feel weak, dizzy, or unwell, seek medical evaluation immediately.

Sarah Adams

75,790 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Warren Buffett turns 93 today! To celebrate, I'm sharing the greatest lecture he ever gave together with his 94 (!) best investment quotes. 1. Rule No. 1 is never lose money. Rule No. 2 is never forget Rule No. 1. 2. Diversification is a protection against ignorance. It makes very little sense for those who know what they're doing. 3. Do not take yearly results too seriously. Instead, focus on four or five-year averages. 4. All there is to investing is picking good stocks at good times and staying with them as long as they remain good companies. 5. American business - and consequently a basket of stocks - is virtually certain to be worth far more in the years ahead. 6. An investor should act as though he had a lifetime decision card with just twenty punches on it. 7. And so the important thing we do with managers, generally, is to find the .400 hitters and then not tell them how to swing. 8. The most important quality for an investor is temperament, not intellect. You need a temperament that neither derives great pleasure from being with the crowd or against the crowd. 9. Bitcoin has no unique value at all. 10. Buy a stock the way you would buy a house. Understand and like it such that you'd be content to own it in the absence of any market. 11. The years ahead will occasionally deliver major market declines - even panics - that will affect virtually all stocks. No one can tell you when these traumas will occur. 12. I insist on a lot of time being spent, almost every day, to just sit and think. That is very uncommon in American business. 13. Buy companies with strong histories of profitability and with a dominant business franchise. 14. For the investor, a too-high purchase price for the stock of an excellent company can undo the effects of a subsequent decade of favorable business developments. 15. I believe in giving my kids enough so they can do anything, but not so much that they can do nothing. 16. The world went mad. What we learn from history is that people don’t learn from history. 17. The key to investing is not assessing how much an industry is going to affect society, or how much it will grow, but rather determining the competitive advantage of any given company and, above all, the durability of that advantage. 18. Among the various propositions offered to you, if you invested in a very low cost index fund - where you don't put the money in at one time, but average in over 10 years - you'll do better than 90% of people who start investing at the same time. 19. Because if you're wrong and rates go to 2 percent, which I don't think they will, you pay it off. It's a one-way renegotiation. It is an incredibly attractive instrument for the homeowner and you've got a one-way bet. 20. Cash is to a business as oxygen is to an individual: never thought about when it is present, the only thing in mind when it is absent. 21. Don't get caught up with what other people are doing. Being a contrarian isn't the key but being a crowd follower isn't either. You need to detach yourself emotionally. 22. For 240 years it's been a terrible mistake to bet against America, and now is no time to start. 23. I never attempt to make money on the stock market. I buy on the assumption that they could close the market the next day and not reopen it for five years. 24. I have no views as to where it (gold) will be, but the one thing I can tell you is it won't do anything between now and then except look at you. Whereas, you know, Coca-Cola will be making money, and I think Wells Fargo will be making a lot of money, and there will be a lot -- and it's a lot -- it's a lot better to have a goose that keeps laying eggs than a goose that just sits there and eats insurance and storage and a few things like that. 25. I just sit in my office and read all day. 26. I won't say if my candidate doesn't win, and probably half the time they haven't, I'm going to take my ball and go home 27. If returns are going to be 7 or 8 percent and you're paying 1 percent for fees, that makes an enormous difference in how much money you're going to have in retirement. 28. We want products where people feel like kissing you instead of slapping you. 29. If you aren't willing to own a stock for ten years, don't even think about owning it for ten minutes. 30. The most important investment you can make is one in yourself. 31. If you buy things you do not need, soon you will have to sell things you need. 32. If you don't feel comfortable making a rough estimate of the asset's future earnings, just forget it and move on. 33. If you like spending six to eight hours per week working on investments, do it. If you don't, then dollar-cost average into index funds. 34. If you're in the luckiest 1% of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99%. 35. If you're smart, you're going to make a lot of money without borrowing. 36. In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497. 37. In the 54 years (Charlie Munger and I) have worked together, we have never forgone an attractive purchase because of the macro or political environment, or the views of other people. In fact, these subjects never come up when we make decisions 38. In the business world, the rearview mirror is always clearer than the windshield. 39. Investors should remember that excitement and expenses are their enemies. 40. It is a terrible mistake for investors with long-term horizons to measure their investment 'risk' by their portfolio's ratio of bonds to stocks. 41. It is not necessary to do extraordinary things to get extraordinary results. 42. It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently. 43. The one thing I will tell you is the worst investment you can have is cash. Everybody is talking about cash being king and all that sort of thing. Cash is going to become worth less over time. But good businesses are going to become worth more over time. 44. It's been an ideal period for investors: A climate of fear is their best friend. Those who invest only when commentators are upbeat end up paying a heavy price for meaningless reassurance. 45. It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is better than yours and you'll drift in that direction. 46. It's better to have a partial interest in the Hope diamond than to own all of a rhinestone. 47. It's far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price. 48. Just pick a broad index like the S&P 500. Don't put your money in all at once; do it over a period of time. 49. Keep things simple and don't swing for the fences. When promised quick profits, respond with a quick "no”. 50. Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding. Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless. 51. Many management teams are just deciding they're gonna buy X billions over X months. That's no way to buy things. You buy when selling for less than they are worth. ... It's not a complicated equation to figure out whether it is beneficial or not to repurchase shares. 52. The difference between successful people and really successful people is that really successful people say no to almost everything. 53. Most people get interested in stocks when everyone else is. The time to get interested is when no one else is. You can't buy what is popular and do well. 54. Never invest in a business you cannot understand. 55. Your premium brand had better be delivering something special, or it’s not going to get the business. 56. One can best prepare themselves for the economic future by investing in your own education. If you study hard and learn at a young age, you will be in the best circumstances to secure your future. 57. The most important thing to do if you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging. 58. One thing that could help would be to write down the reason you are buying a stock before your purchase. Write down "I am buying Microsoft at $300 billion because..." Force yourself to write this down. It clarifies your mind and discipline. 59. Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked. 60. Opportunities come infrequently. When it rains gold, put out the bucket, not the thimble. 61. Price is what you pay. Value is what you get. 62. Read 500 pages like this every day. That's how knowledge works. It builds up, like compound interest. All of you can do it, but I guarantee not many of you will do it. 63. Risk comes from not knowing what you're doing. 64. If a business does well, the stock eventually follows. 65. Since I know of no way to reliably predict market movements, I recommend that you purchase Berkshire shares only if you expect to hold them for at least five years. Those who seek short-term profits should look elsewhere. 66. Someone's sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree a long time ago 67. The best thing that happens to us is when a great company gets into temporary trouble... We want to buy them when they're on the operating table. 68. Speculation is most dangerous when it looks easiest. 69. Stay away from it. It's a mirage, basically...The idea that it has some huge intrinsic value is a joke in my view. 70. The best chance to deploy capital is when things are going down. 71. The stock market is a no-called-strike game. You don't have to swing at everything -- you can wait for your pitch. 72. There is nothing wrong with a 'know nothing' investor who realizes it. The problem is when you are a 'know nothing' investor but you think you know something. 73. This does not bother Charlie and me. Indeed, we enjoy such price declines if we have funds available to increase our positions. 74. Too-big-to-fail is not a fallback position at Berkshire. Instead, we will always arrange our affairs so that any requirements for cash we may conceivably have will be dwarfed by our own liquidity. 75. There are all kinds of businesses that Charlie and I don’t understand, but that doesn’t cause us to stay up at night. It just means we go on to the next one, and that’s what the individual investor should do. 76. You can’t buy what is popular and do well. 77. We never want to count on the kindness of strangers in order to meet tomorrow's obligations. When forced to choose, I will not trade even a night's sleep for the chance of extra profits. 78. We will reject interesting opportunities rather than over-leverage our balance sheet. 79. We've long felt that the only value of stock forecasters is to make fortune tellers look good. Even now, Charlie and I continue to believe that short-term market forecasts are poison and should be kept locked up in a safe place, away from children and also from grown-ups who behave in the market like children. 80. What is smart at one price is stupid at another. 81. What we learn from history is that people don't learn from history. 82. When stock can be bought below a business's value it is probably the best use of cash. 83. When trillions of dollars are managed by Wall Streeters charging high fees, it will usually be the managers who reap outsized profits, not the clients. 84. When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever. 85. When you have able managers of high character running businesses about which they are passionate, you can have a dozen or more reporting to you and still have time for an afternoon nap. Conversely, if you have even one person reporting to you who is deceitful, inept or uninterested, you will find yourself with more than you can handle. 86. Whether we're talking about socks or stocks, I like buying quality merchandise when it is marked down. 87. Widespread fear is your friend as an investor because it serves up bargain purchases. 88. You are neither right nor wrong because the crowd disagrees with you. You are right because your data and reasoning are right. 89. You can't borrow money at 18 or 20 percent and come out ahead. 90. You can't produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant. 91. The most important quality for an investor is temperament, not intellect… You need a temperament that neither derives great pleasure from being with the crowd or against the crowd. 92. You don't need to be a rocket scientist. Investing is not a game where the guy with the 160 IQ beats the guy with 130 IQ. You only have to be able to evaluate companies within your circle of competence. 93. The size of your circle of competence is not very important; knowing its boundaries, however, is vital.

Compounding Quality

621,072 просмотров • 3 лет назад

** Call to Action for Global Pioneers: Uniting Efforts to Stabilize the GCV Price in the Exchange Market** Dear Global Pioneers, We are currently at a critical juncture that may determine our ability to swiftly realize the GCV in the exchange market. As of now, we are in the Open Network phase, which serves as a preparatory stage for a fully decentralized network where all code can be activated. It is important to note that the Pi Network has not registered as a security because it aims to function as a digital currency rather than a digital asset. However, given recent list on the exchange market, compliance with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is now necessary for Pi Network, which subsequently require CT not to guide Pi's price in the exchange market. To address this situation, we urge all pioneers to unite in a call auction to ensure the GCV is stabilized as soon as possible. We implore you not to sell below the GCV price. Conversely, you are encouraged to buy if you have the means, as the current prices are significantly low. It is essential to emphasize that we are now in the Open Network phase, permitting both buying and selling. We have observed that many pioneers may be hesitant to make purchases; however, it is imperative that you do not let this concern deter you. We have surpassed the enclosed mainnet phase, where buying and selling were prohibited. Increasing liquidity in the exchange market is crucial for attracting external investors. At this stage, the combined strength of all pioneers is required to enhance purchasing power and to capitalize on lower prices. Please clarify your understanding of our current pricing situation. The existing market prices do not reflect Pi's value of our source code, which is derived from our blockchain record. Our efforts have previously focused on establishing Pi as a digital currency, culminating in the creation of the GCV blockchain record, which has indeed achieved success. For instance, the GitHub record indicates a GCV of $314,159, and Mr. Kasasih's code fork has now been integrated into the CT’s main bran code of the signifying its official status. The rationale for the current low prices in the exchange market stems, in part, from a lack of awareness among many pioneers, some of whom may be in financially constrained positions and require immediate funds for necessities. Such individuals may be misled by those who do not support GCV's potential, thereby selling their holdings at depressed prices. This underscores the importance of CT's control over KYC processes and migration procedures. Allowing all pioneers pass KYC and migrating Pi could lead to detrimental outcomes for the project, as uninformed pioneers may sell at significantly low prices. Just we see right now there are a lot of pioneers sell at very low price. So, CT only allow 10 million wallets migrated. It is important to recognize that the current low pricing is not the fault of the PCT or GCV CT, it is a consequence of a collective lack of proactive engagement from the pioneers. By promoting education on the true value of Pi as GCV, we can mitigate the prevalence of low-price sellers. While complaints about pricing may arise, it is essential to understand that we cannot prevent pioneers from selling. What we can do is purchase the available low-priced offerings from the market and collectively urge all pioneers not to sell below the GCV price. This remains a top priority for all involved if we aim to achieve the OM status swiftly. Additionally, it is vital to understand that the CT cannot announce the price of Pi in the exchange market, nor can they buy all the Pi in the exchange market. The price must ultimately be determined by the actions of our pioneering community and outside investors. Therefore, it is everyone's responsibility to refrain from complaints and instead focus on advancing the project collectively. We recommend all pioneers take the following actions: - Do not sell below $314,159. Please list selling price at $314,159. You should have confidence on GCV when it has been in the code already. Once the OM completed; all ecosystems will implement GCV. And you don’t need to wait long time and I estimate in one month or less. - Consider purchasing if you have extra funds available but ensure that you are not borrowing money or using essential living funds for these investments. Any amount such as $10 or $20 or $100 you choose to invest can contribute to increasing the visibility of Pi in the exchange market, potentially attracting outside investors. Also, many pioneers have locked three years with 100%, it is a good chance. You can acquire 6 Pi for just $10 right now. Once our pioneers warm up the market, you'll see outside investors becoming active, so there's no need to worry about how long or how much funding it will take to reach GCV. As soon as the low-priced Pi are being purchased, the price is poised to surge from just a few dollars to GCV in no time. We won't follow the traditional cryptocurrency path for growth because we have a strong community backing GCV.` It is crucial for all global pioneers to recognize that we are all collectively striving towards the successful realization of the OM. The CT shares this goal as well. However, if the exchange market price remains as low as $1 or $2, the likelihood of merchants joining the Pi Network diminishes. It is imperative that the gap between the ecosystem's Pi value and its exchange market price remain minimal. If the exchange price is low, it inhibits the CT's ability to fulfill ecosystem objectives. You need not worry about protracted timelines. With collective action, the path to achieving GCV can be expedited. While it would indeed be beneficial for the CT to manage arrangements efficiently, it is vital that we do not adopt a passive stance, awaiting resolutions. Delays could adversely affect both the reputation of PCT and the GCV CT. Lastly, I would like to address recent rumors suggesting that pioneers are unable to transfer Pi to or from the exchange market; this information is misleading. Pi Network is indeed open already, and the CT has verified five exchange markets for transactions. I have personally encountered challenges while attempting to purchase 1,000 Pi on the exchange market, with multiple platforms rejecting my credit and debit card payments. Nonetheless, I firmly believe that this represents a valuable investment opportunity critical for advancing our collective mission toward GCV unification in the exchange market. Your understanding of this message and prompt actions will be appreciated as we move forward together. Best regards, Doris Yin🪷🪷🪷 Founder, Global GCV Movement Feb.23rd, 2025

Doris Yin 东方紫莲🪷

143,141 просмотров • 1 год назад

Charlie Munger literally explained how "Inversion Thinking" helped him become a billionaire: 1. He solves every problem backwards. Munger calls it inversion, and he uses it constantly. Most people ask how do I succeed at this. He asks the opposite: what would guarantee failure here, and then he simply avoids that. He says it works like algebra. Some problems you cannot solve forwards, but invert them and the answer falls out easily. 2. As a young weather forecaster, he asked how he could kill pilots. Stationed in the Air Corps ferry command, drawing weather maps alone in a hangar at night, he didn't ask how to forecast well. He asked: how would I most easily kill these pilots? He worked it through in reverse and found only two answers. Send them into icing their plane couldn't handle, or send them somewhere they'd run out of fuel before any airport was clear. He became fanatical about avoiding exactly those two things. 3. He points out that inversion could have saved Kobe Bryant. The two ways he found to kill a pilot, icing and getting caught out with nowhere to land, are flight risks a disciplined person simply refuses to take. If someone around Kobe had thought that way, Munger says, he'd still be here. It was so stupid, in his words, to die that way. The whole point of inversion is that the fatal error is usually obvious once you go looking for it on purpose. 4. His grandfather taught him the same trick as a boy. When Munger went swimming, his grandfather told him to swim as long as he wanted, but stay near the shore. It sounds simple enough to laugh at, but it's inversion in one sentence: don't optimize for the best swim, eliminate the way you drown. Munger insists the man was genuinely wise. 5. The military gave him a second trick: bracketing. In ROTC he was taught to fire mortar shells one long, one short, then correct to land the next one on target. He says he never fired a real shell in his life, but he has used that bracketing method to size decisions ever since. When he needs to know how big or small to make something, he brackets it high and low and closes in. Kapow. 6. His best inversion turned $125,000 into $600,000. As a young lawyer he had a client whose ranch land the Edison Company wanted an easement through. The client's famous, pompous appraiser valued it at $125,000, using the standard two-dimensional method: comparable sales, price per acre, acreage. Munger, who wasn't even an appraiser, saw the flaw. The land was hilly. 7. He forced the problem into three dimensions and the answer changed completely. Hilly land gets developed by lopping off the tops of hills and filling the valleys. The transmission towers would freeze the grade and make that impossible, doing enormous damage the flat, two-dimensional appraisal never captured. The old appraiser refused to change a thing, so Munger told his client to fire the twit, hired one who could think in three dimensions, and got $600,000 out of honest engineers who also thought that way. 8. The more due diligence someone does, the weaker a thinker they usually are. This is his sharpest line. Munger says endless analysis is often just a way of soothing an inner insecurity, and it doesn't actually work. The genuinely capable thinkers understand a situation fast and act. The armies of young lawyers billing by the hour to comb through every purchase order are, more often than not, papering over the fact that they can't see the answer. 9. You don't need certainty. You need to be about 96% sure. Munger is blunt that waiting for 100% is a mistake, because in most cases 96% is all you're ever entitled to, and the rest is wasted motion. The skill is knowing when you already have enough to act, and having the nerve to move on it. 10. He and Buffett closed a multibillion-dollar oil deal in about two days. When Occidental needed money fast to buy Anadarko, Munger didn't fly anywhere or run endless analytics. He and Buffett talked by phone, and after decades together, he says, one grunt speaks a volume. It was obvious: the Permian Basin is America's best oil, layer after layer with nothing comparable, and they'd get an 8% preferred dividend from a reputable operator plus upside. A no-brainer, he says, as long as you don't insist on making it hard.

Jaynit

247,968 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

TOPIC #44: BUILDING MOMENTUM FOR PI NETWORK OM Today let's discuss "building momentum". Sun Tzu was a Chinese military general, strategist, philosopher, and writer who lived during the Eastern Zhou period. Sun Tzu is traditionally credited as the author of The Art of War, an influential work of military strategy that has affected both Western and East Asian philosophy and military thought. In his chapter "Momentum" of Sun Tzu "The Art of War" said: 👉"Thus, a good warrior seeks it in the situation, not in the person, so he can choose the person and take advantage of the situation. A warrior who takes advantage of the situation fights like turning wood or stone. The nature of wood or stone is that when it is at peace, it is still; when it is in danger, it moves; when it is square, it stops; when it is round, it moves. Therefore, a warrior's situation is like turning a round stone on a mountain thousands of feet high; this is the situation." 👉Meaning: People who are good at leading troops in battle always try to create a favorable situation, and do not demand perfection from their subordinates, so they can select talents to utilize and create a favorable situation. People who are good at utilizing the situation command the army to fight, just like rolling wood and stones. The characteristics of wood and stone are that they are still when placed in a flat and stable place, and they roll when placed in a steep and rugged place. Square things are easy to be still, and round things are flexible to roll. Therefore, the favorable situation created by people who are good at commanding battles is like rolling a round stone down from a mountain, which is the so-called "momentum" ✳️Let's discuss how we can begin building good momentum before OM. In order to use the situation to successfully build momentum for OM at GCV $314,159, we need to consider our current situation: 1. We can see that blockchain shows more big amount transfers on the blockchain, such as thousands and hundreds of Pi per transaction. This could be from ecosystem payments or black market sales, but most of the thousands or hundreds seem to come from black market policy violations. We also notice that the migration speed is generally much slower, averaging around a thousand per day. We did observe that CT can reach a speed of 60,000 wallets per day. Therefore, we can estimate that migration speed is related to black market activities. When there are more black market activities, there is a higher risk to the project and CT will be more conservative. Therefore, we should focus on community education. We have an International Telegram Group where you are welcome to invite your friends or any pioneers who have gotten lost to join in. 2. Now, GCV data is much lower than before as previously estimated. This is because most of the community has used up their resources and run out of money to provide full Pi payments. Even though we don't have much GCV data, GCV still holds significant value in the hearts of most pioneers. Therefore, we can say that GCV $314,159, the primary currency function "value scale," has been successfully completed. 3. Now, we must move on to the next step: allowing Pi GCV to circulate in the Pi community ecosystem. It's crucial that we only create GCV data and not other data. "The Art of War" Chapter" Momentum" told us how to do it. 👉We should carefully consider strategies to incentivize merchants to join our ecosystem and automatically transfer pioneer purchase habits within it so that GCV data will automatically created by normal business. Since Pi is not yet recognized as a legal form of payment by any government, we are currently in the "circulate tool" phase within the community. As such, it may not be feasible to require merchants to accept full Pi payments. Understanding the operational constraints faced by merchants in this regard is essential. Merchants need FIAT for bookkeeping, government taxes, employee wages, rent, materials, and utilities. They can only ensure the sustainability of their business by accepting Pi as profit. 👉In light of the widespread economic challenges, which have resulted in high unemployment rates and financial hardships for many, businesses are also finding it tough to sell products, particularly small and emerging businesses. To support these businesses, we could introduce a phased approach, allowing them to accept partial payments in both FIAT and Pi, and gradually transition to full Pi payments when OM. This approach will undoubtedly be beneficial for them, and could contribute to GCV data generation. 👉Similarly, for pioneers facing financial difficulties due to inflation and unemployment, the option to save money on essential expenses through a combination of partial Pi and FIAT payments would be welcomed. It's crucial to highlight the potential benefits and savings that could be achieved through this approach, contributing to the growth of GCV as well. 🙏Implementing a method aligned with these practices will serve to attract more merchants and pioneers to join our network. Furthermore, broadening our user base and promoting the use of Pi for transactions is pivotal for the success of our ecosystem. This approach could lead to a collaborative and mutually beneficial ecosystem, providing value to all participants and driving the momentum of the Pi Network. ✳️In Conclusion: Only when we understand the situation well can we build momentum that benefits the Pi Network community as a whole. In this manner, the Pi Network ecosystem will exhibit heightened activity, and the GCV data will possess a robust and well-established foundation. When OM, there will be no uncertainty or necessity for CT announcements pertaining to the price. This is owing to widespread acceptance and acknowledgment of GCV within the pioneering and merchant as well as among service providers, over a span of 5 months. It is inconceivable that Dr. Nicolas would disavow GCV as the price established by pioneers. Hence, without a shadow of doubt, GCV will emerge as the price when OM. According to The Art of War, building momentum is crucial for success in any important situation. Of course, it applies to Pi Network as well! 👉Today, a video featuring products from the Canadian GCV merchant "Maiden's Heart" was published. The merchant accepts 70% fiat and 30% Pi payment and offers free shipping to the USA and Canada, with all prices inclusive of shipping fees. For further inquiries, please contact them via email at [email protected] or visit their website at Doris Yin 🪷🪷🪷

Doris Yin 东方紫莲🪷

19,076 просмотров • 2 лет назад

"We had people around us that started having things happen. And not all of it was rosy. We didn't know that...it's gonna stay with you for maybe...years and years or the rest of your life." ~Mr. B. A Whole Lot of Not Rosy Robert Bigelow: "And so, it (survival of consciousness research) does have this aspect of things to be concerned about. And you know, I've told you that since we formed this institute (Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS)) in June (of 2020), all of a sudden, we had people around us that started having things happen. And not all of it was rosy, okay?” (I really hope he give details in a future interview because I think it's important to know what happened. Just the formation of an institute that planned on studying consciousness caused phenomena to start taking place and some of it was negative in nature. To me, that's problematic. Did anybody get injured or sick, or were they just scared?) Bigelow: "So, I mean, this is family members, myself, my staff. And none of this we expected, we hadn't asked for anything, positioned anything, decided to do anything in this kind of research. Our whole intention to begin with was simply trying to get ourselves up to speed in the literature, after being away from this for so many years, focusing on [the] space world, right? That's been mainly what I've been doing - except for the Skinwalker Ranch thing for 20 years - is the space world...has been huge in my life to pursue. The legitimate, parochial kind of, you know, using fire engines, rockets to get you there (smiles). "So we didn't expect anything like this to happen." (Again, this is various phenomena that allegedly started happening once they formed BICS with the intention of studying consciousness (including life after death), and apparently, some of it was not good. Again, did anybody get hurt? Exactly how bad was it? Details are sorely needed.) Bigelow: "And so, this Holy Grail is different than the second Holy Grail. If the second one being the ET, is a little bit lower. And this first one: Is there any part of your consciousness that survives your bodily death? That's a big deal, that's a huge story, that's gigantic." (I'd push back and suggest that both Holy Grails may be connected or related and the 2nd one may not be ET at all. This other intelligence (which John Keel labelled, "Ultraterrestrials") may reside in, or be able to enter, the same realms we enter when we die. There’s strong evidence that psychic mediums can acquire information they had no way of knowing about via their five senses. But are they talking to the dead, or is something else going on?) ~~~Excerpt from Operation Trojan Horse by John Keel~~~ In 1866, a New Englander named William Denton declared himself to be the first modern contactee. He claimed to be in telepathic contact with beings from another planet, and he and his whole family later purportedly visited Venus and Mars. Denton wrote a series of books describing saucer-shaped vehicles in detail, which he thought were made of aluminum. (A commercial process for manufacturing aluminum was not invented until 1886.) He also told his audiences (he lectured widely) that the folks who rode around in aluminum airships looked very much like us. His narratives were, in many respects, identical to those of the modern contactees. Trance Mediums and Possession Trance mediums were nothing new in 1850. In the Bible’s First Book of Samuel, Chapter 28 describes how Saul consulted a medium (“… a woman that hath-a familiar spirit”). Mediums acted as oracles in ancient times, and people with this peculiar gift appeared in each new generation. Such persons seem to serve as instruments through which the ultraterrestrials can speak to us directly, and they often come up with amazingly accurate prophecies of the future and precise details of events that could seemingly be known only to the dead relatives of the people who consulted them. Of course, when spiritualism became a national fad, a goodly number of charlatans and hucksters moved in. But most of the genuine mediums exercised their talents carefully and for free. They did not indulge in fancy hocus-pocus and did not need paraphernalia, such as spirit cabinets. They were—and are—people who can apparently summon up unseen entities or alien intelligences and extract information from them. I am not a spiritualist myself, although I have attended a few séances over the years, usually in the role of a scoffer and disbeliever. As a longtime amateur magician, I have been able to see through the frauds, but I have also been genuinely perplexed by some of the manifestations I have personally witnessed. (I recommend everybody read about The Scole Experiment or watch the documentary on YT about it. And...read the book, "Ghost Hunters" by Deborah Blum. Related links here: ) ~ Back to OTH... Essentially, a trance medium lapses into an unconscious state, and while in this condition, his or her body is taken over by some outside influence. This influence is usually a self-styled “Indian guide” from “the other side.” Many mediums have been simple, uneducated people, but when in a trance state they have been able to talk foreign languages fluently. Scientists and clergymen have put countless mediums through severe tests over the years. At one group of séances in the 1920s, sitters, who were all versed in different languages, grilled mediums in everything from ancient Chinese to Swahili, and the controlling entities not only conversed in those languages but corrected the sitters’ grammar! The daughter of Judge Edmunds, president of the Senate in the 1850s, gave incredible performances while in a trance, speaking fluently in Greek, Spanish, Polish, Latin, Portuguese, Hungarian, and several Indian languages. Because the sitters—and the mediums—assume that they are dealing with residents of heaven, they ask mostly spiritual questions. Customarily, the “control” will announce that Mr. Blank is standing next to him and wishes to speak to Mrs. Blank, who is attending the séance. Mrs. Blank excitedly begins to question her dead husband, Mr. Blank. How is life on the other side? Just fine, the control replies, a little bored, everyone lives in vine-covered cottages, and all is sweetness and light. Where did Mr. Blank hide his valuable gold watch before he died? It’s wrapped in an old sock and buried under some papers in the bottom drawer of the old rolltop desk, the control answers. Sure enough, when Mrs. Blank gets home, she finds the watch exactly where the medium’s alter ego said it would be. Try to convince Mrs. Blank that she didn’t talk with her dead husband! In many cases, the medium even begins to talk in a voice that sounds exactly like the dead Mr. Blank, uses his pet expressions, and even refers to things known only to Mrs. Blank, indulges in their private jokes, and so on. Occasionally, a deceased celebrity will “break through.” Recently the late George Bernard Shaw made a tape recording in England that is now circulating in occult circles. Those who knew Shaw claim that it sounds exactly like him, uses his phraseology and vocal mannerisms, and displays his brilliant and distinctive wit. The trance phenomenon deserves extensive study because so many aspects of it are directly related to the contactee phenomenon. The contactees have been told a hundred different stories of what life is like on other planets. If you review the descriptions of heaven produced at the thousands of possibly genuine séances, you will find the same contradictions. The entities will lie transparently at one point in the séance, and a few moments later will come up with astounding information that could not be based upon simple trickery. The mediums themselves have always been aware of their controls’ mischievous sense of humor. They speak of false shades and malevolent spirits who perform outrageous hoaxes. So the mediums and the professional investigators are always wary. The fact that a control can imitate George Bernard Shaw does not necessarily mean that GBS is doing the speaking from the spirit world. The fact that a control knows where Mr. Blank hid his gold watch does not necessarily prove that Mr. Blank is standing at his side “on the other plane.” The medium generally remains completely inert while in the trance or “occupied” state but in some instances can become quite animated and make gestures appropriate to whatever is being said. In a very real sense, the medium’s mind has been blanked out, and his or her body has been completely taken over by the control. The medium has become a zombie of sorts, possessed by an alien entity, an entity who lacks a physical form of his own. Contactees often find themselves suddenly miles from home without knowing how they got there. They either have induced amnesia, wiping out all memory of the trip, or they were taken over by some means and made the trip in a blacked-out state. Should they encounter a friend on the way, the friend would probably note that their eyes seemed glassy and their behavior seemed peculiar. But if the friend spoke to them, he might receive a curt reply. In the language of the silent contactees this process is called being used. A used person can suddenly lose a day or a week out of his life. I have known silent contactees to disappear from their homes for long periods, and when they returned, they had little or no recollection of where they had been. One girl sent me a postcard from the Bahama Islands—which surprised me because I knew she was very poor. When she returned, she told me that she had only one memory of the trip. She said she remembered getting off a jet at an airport—she couldn’t recall getting on the jet or making the trip—and there “Indians” met her and took her baggage. She remembered nothing further after that. The next thing she knew she was back home again. It seems likely the same methods are applied to both mediums and contactees. In the case of the mediums, the mind control serves a useful purpose. It enables the entities to establish direct vocal communication with us and, in many instances, pass along worthwhile information. This process can also be destructive. A young man from Ithaca, New York, called me some time ago at the urging of William Donovan, president of Aerial Investigation and Research (AIR), to tell me of his close brush with death. One evening in the fall of 1967, he said, he left his home to drive to a meeting. For some reason he couldn’t explain, he got out of his car, went back into his house, and carried out several aimless actions such as picking up a book from a table and putting it on the shelf. “Finally, I said to myself, Okay, it’s time,” he told me. He remembers leaving the house and again heading for his parked car. The next thing he knew he was in a hospital bed. He had apparently driven about four miles to a railroad crossing just in time to meet an oncoming train. His car was demolished, but he escaped rather miraculously with only a few minor injuries. If he had not gone back into the house and carried out those meaningless, time-killing chores, he would have avoided the train altogether. It is possible, of course, that the shock of the accident blotted out his memory of that four-mile drive—but he couldn’t even remember putting the key in the ignition. This man had been active in investigating the UFO flap that took place around the radio telescope installations near Ithaca in 1967-68. In his book Passport to Magonia, Dr. Jacques Vallee, a NASA astronomer and computer expert, touches on all this. “In the Soviet Union, not so long ago, a leading plasma physicist died in strange circumstances,” Dr. Vallee states. “He was thrown under a Moscow subway train by a mentally deranged woman. It is noteworthy that she claimed a ‘voice from space’ had given her orders to kill that particular man—orders she could not resist. Soviet criminologists, I have been reliably informed, are worried by the increase of such cases in recent years. Madmen rushing through the streets because they think the Martians are after them have always been commonplace. But the current wave of mental imbalance that can be specifically tied to the rise and development of the contactee myth is an aspect of the UFO problem that must be considered with special care.” So there seem to be both good and evil forces at work in this type of phenomenon. The good guys latch onto people with particularly receptive minds and turn them into trance mediums. The bad guys use the same methods to tamper with the minds of contactees and even to commit murders indirectly. Because incidents of these types can be traced throughout history, it seems probable that these forces have always been extant on this planet. When the good guys worked through mediums, they needed some excuse that we would accept. The answer seemed to be “communication with the dead.” These communicative efforts led to the foundation of spiritualism, and the entities played the role to the hilt, using their complete knowledge of us and our individual lives to provide us with “proof” of the existence of a spirit world. This is the same precise methodology being employed with the UFOs to build up support for the extraterrestrial thesis. We humans need acceptable explanations for unnatural phenomena, so “they” happily—and often humorously—supply us with all the explanations we can handle. At the same time, they give us tiny fragments of the real truth, hoping no doubt that we will be able to digest them slowly. Ever so slowly. In earlier times it seems as if they made a complicated attempt to convey the truth to us through mediums and psychics, but we chose to misinterpret these efforts and placed them within the context of our primitive religious beliefs. We are still doing this, and they are going along with it because even misinterpreted communication is better than no communication at all. Religion may not be truth but may merely be a step on the long path of the real truth. Do the ultraterrestrials really care about us? There is much disturbing evidence that they don’t. They care only to the extent that we can fulfill our enigmatic use to them. The Reverend Arthur Ford is one of America’s best-known trance mediums. For most of his life he has served as an instrument for an entity who calls himself Fletcher. In 1928, Fletcher announced that Harry Houdini (who had died in 1926) was on hand and had a message which he wanted conveyed to his widow, Beatrice. The message was in a code once used by the Houdinis in a mind-reading act. This code was known only to the couple and had never been published or revealed to anyone. Fletcher, through Ford, was able to give precise details of this secret code, and Mrs. Houdini later confirmed that the message had to come from her husband. This was only one of Ford’s many coups. In the fall of 1967, Ford went into a trance on Canadian television and produced a message for Bishop James Pike from his deceased son. Bishop Pike, who was present at this televised séance, avowed that the message seemed authentic and seemed to come from the familiar personality of his son. This well-publicized séance launched a major revival of spiritualism in the United States. Reverend Ford travels in high circles but has never made any material gain from his peculiar gift. He gives freely of his time—and Fletcher’s advice from the other side—at séances all over the country. Mrs. Ruth Montgomery, the well-known author and Washington reporter, tells of the time that Reverend Ford visited her in Washington and lapsed into a trance so she could ask Fletcher for some advice on his behalf. Reverend Ford was then in the process of moving and wanted to know what he should do with some of his things. Fletcher seemed totally disinterested in Ford’s problems, Mrs. Montgomery reported, and when she asked if Ford should visit a clinic for a checkup, Fletcher snapped, “He’d better do something. If he doesn’t, I can’t work through him much longer.” Although Reverend Ford had voluntarily submitted his person to Fletcher’s use for nearly half a century, the entity was apparently completely disinterested in his problems and welfare. This is, alas, rather typical. Even the most helpful entities seem more dedicated to the job of communicating than to any kind of involvement with those to whom (or through whom) they are communicating. The bizarre history of psychic phenomena is filled with Fletchers. Mrs. Montgomery, incidentally, indulges in automatic writing herself and has received constant messages for the past few years, many of which have been valid prophecies and stern advice meant to govern her future actions. There have been innumerable psychic hoaxes for the past 150 years, and many of these parallel the UFO hoaxes. In 1855, the Fox sisters confessed that their spirit rappings were a hoax. They said they produced the sounds by “snapping their toes.” Think about that for a moment. Snapping your toes so that it sounded like a rap on a wall or table would be a most remarkable talent—perhaps even more remarkable than the ability to communicate with the spirit world. I don’t believe I would pay ten cents to hear someone talk to a rapping spirit—but I would happily pay five dollars to examine someone who could duplicate the rapping sound by snapping his toes. Later the two sisters said the confession was false, and they had been bribed to make it. "Mrs. Houdini was genuinely astonished and impressed by Reverend Ford’s messages from her husband, and she made numerous public statements to that effect, as well as signing various affidavits. But later, in the 1930s, she chose to deny it all for a time. Then, shortly before her death, she reversed her denials. In ufology we have to contend with teenagers’ hot-air balloons, and in psychic phenomena we have to worry about youngsters firing rocks at houses with slingshots and phony mediums levitating “spirit trumpets” with black thread. But there are many more UFO sightings than there are plastic balloons, and there are more poltergeists dumping rocks in living rooms than there are wild-eyed youngsters with slingshots. There are also more ultraterrestrial entities than either the occultists or the UFO enthusiasts dream of." ~~~Edit of the Bigelow Interview~~~ Bigelow: "I also, I was...I got very disturbed toward the end (of AAWSAP) about something that happened to some of the government people, and I realized uhh...holy crap." (Read, "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon." I think it's one of the most important UFO books in recent memory.) George Knapp: "Hitchhikers." Bigelow: "Umm... Well, yeah. You know. So, hitchhikers being that you take things home with you. Everybody took things home with them. I took things to my house. Things happened to my wife, and to me. Different things. So, everybody took things home. We all, you know, we did. But we didn't know that, gee, it was like, gonna be kind of permanent. You know, we didn't know that, you know? That it's gonna stay with you for maybe...for years and years or the rest of your life, who knows? "But the ones that bothered me a lot where anybody got hurt or really disturbed... Not that it happened on the ranch, it was when they left the ranch. As you say, hitchhikers. And these were government people and it affected them." Knapp: "In very dramatic ways, though." Bigelow: "Very dramatic ways. Very dramatic ways. You know, and there's a cousin to that that we're facing, but it's abated, at least for now. And this other survival topic, right? The very dramatic kind of things that we wanted to have reduced or stopped." (The "cousin" to the hitchhiker phenomenon features the not-so-rosy things he referred to early on in this clip. But at least it had abated at the time of this interview. Has it started up again?) Bigelow: "But going back to the government people, the buyer (Brandon Fugal) came along at the right time, I had decided I wanted to tone down..." Knapp: "Take this off your plate." Bigelow: "Yeah, take it off my plate, tone it down, and if necessary, just lock it up and forget about it. And next thing I know, you know, [Fugal] comes along and, you know, the rest is history." Knapp: "Before we leave this, though, the incidents that happened to you, to your wife, to Colm (Kelleher), to me, the, you know, you bring it home. How does everybody handle that? I mean, is it spooky at the time, and do you draw the connection that it's ranch related?" Bigelow: "Yes and no. If the events hadn't happened very often prior to the ranch, then it's not ranch connected. But they did happen." (I think he meant to say, if the events hadn't happened prior to him buying the ranch in 1996 and did happen once he made the purchase, then it would seem to be connected just to the ranch. But he says these anomalous events did happen before he bought it. Maybe some events were connected to the ranch and others were not? Or, this precognitive sentient phenomenon, as John Alexander labelled it, was able to know that Bigelow was going to purchase the ranch in the future and began interacting with him and his wife before he bought it?) Bigelow: "And [these anomalous events] did [happen], where we lived with my wife and I. We had a poltergeist event one time that was really fun and very different, and that was before I ever acquired the ranch. My wife was a very strong - and probably still is, in spirit - person. And so she took them in stride. She had a full manifestation of an apparition, a human-form apparition in the bedroom, and looking at her. "And this was a holy cow. And she happened to tell me, kind of like, 'Oh, well, while you were gone, this is what happened here, a manifestation of this.' I've heard this kind of thing many times through other people, and recently. And she felt the bed depress as there was a curiosity going on because the facial features were distinctive enough to be able to...as though, 'Who are you and what are you doing here?' Coming from the manifestation from the apparition, looking at her, right? "And torso up was kind of what was manifested. And being able to see and feel the mattress being depressed as it's looking at you, wondering, 'Who are you?' That kind of look on the face. 'What are you doing here?' You know, usually you think it would be the opposite direction. 'Who the hell are you?'" (Fully-formed apparitions have been reported over the last 150 years or so but many times only partial bodies are seen. In this case, Mrs. Bigelow only saw the apparition from the torso up. When Leslie Kean sat with physical medium, Stewart Alexander, she said she only saw a hand form. The alleged spirits will say that, many times, it takes too much energy to form a full body. Learn more about the Kean encounter here: ) ~ Knapp: "Was [Mrs. Bigelow] freaked out?" Bigelow: "No. No, she wasn't. There was a bar of light - so this was not normal in the survival research, but maybe in the ET - that was between her pillows. A bar of light. It wasn't coming in from shutters or blinds or anything from the room or any kind of other light source. You could cover, put the pillows down, and the bar would not be reflected on the surface of the object above it, on the second pillow. It only happened when you did this. And she did that and said, 'Oh, well.' I said, 'Well, what did you do?' "'Well, I went to sleep.' Went to sleep, so..." ~~~ (In January of 2012, NYT journalist, Ralph Blumenthal wrote an article about Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies (BICS). He ended it with this: ) "One personal footnote. Don’t ask me what happened on Jan. 4 at 5:45 a.m. as I lay sleepless, wrestling with this story. A tremendous bang jolted me and my wife and the dog upright. We found the glass door to our 12th-floor terrace completely spiderwebbed with cracks as if struck with tremendous force, but there was no sign of any projectile. Invisible moisture between the double panes? Or something else? There are things I don’t mind talking about and things I do mind talking about." (Was this prosaic or just more of the not-so-rosy phenomena Bigelow referenced? We need to know!)

Joe Murgia

106,462 просмотров • 1 год назад

About a month ago, a clip of mine went viral⁽¹⁾ talking about the Current State of Twitch (3rd thumbnail in this tweet). It resonated w/ people outside my community, so lemme elaborate (as a 10yr+ Twitch Veteran). Current State of Twitch isn't great and haven't been for a while. I've been passionate about Twitch since inception (I joined in April 2011 in the JTV days, a few months before Twitch debuted in July 2011), and been trying to instill positive change but I'm only a cog in the machine compared to where influence can impact — likely via Amazon-appointed Executives to help "oversee things" at decade-old-acquisition-that-has-still-generated-zero-profit Twitch⁽²⁾. ------------------------------------------------ Twitch's Muddled Identity ------------------------------------------------ Describing Twitch 10 years ago was easy: "Youtube, except always live, for gamers". Now, it's more muddled & fluid, at best: "Always live broadcasters who aim to connect with their viewers and foster communities(?)" — that, in itself, isn't problematic; but how it's accomplished, what methods are most effective, and how certain directories accumulate higher viewership is, I think (I may elaborate further on that in a future tweet). The most common reactive bark I've heard following TwitchCon 2025 is "Ban Politics" or "Make it Gaming-Only Again!" — People forget, but Pokemon GO (June 2016) going worldwide-viral was the crack-in-the-dam that lead to IRL as a directory because of the impracticality of continuing Twitch's "games-only" era as the site was increasing in popularity, reach, and cultural significance. IRL was a band-aid solution for the core function of Directories⁽³⁾ (which was to let would-be-browsers make better-informed decisions on what to watch based on their interest). It's too broad and encompassing, which led to an unintended dopamine-producing⁽⁴⁾ psuedo-ChatRoulette where you "never know what you're gonna see" browsing there. Without a better tool to migrate users or aggregate topical content, this problem exacerbated continuously. Just Chatting was supposed to be the solution, as it came with 11-12 other directories⁽⁵⁾ to attemptedly split the IRL monolith, but failed to inspire Social Behavioral Change tremendously. Just Chatting is more popular than ever, discoverability — like in the broad, functional sense — is busted cuz every genre of content stuffed within it and fails to disincentivize streamers from opting-out of the most popular directory. So, how do you stand-out in the overcrowded field where a fuckton of the viewership goes for a Roulette Pull on something entertaining to watch? ... ------------------------------------------------ The Era of Clout-Farming Content (and the fact it works, ugh) ------------------------------------------------ Once IRL directory came in Sept 2016, so did the meta of skirting the ToS (Terms of Service) to maximize views or push the limits of what was tolerated on Twitch. Fundamentally, the social dynamic of receiving a suspension (everyone generally refers to them colloquially as "bans") earns notoriety and "free vacation/marketing", that when coinciding with a comeback event, open the possibility of a net-positive from the boost in viewership or metrics. This isn't as relevant now because the ToS Enforcement has gotten significant buffs to be more transparent and structural in the last half-decade. I can't speak on the nuance of this now, but "Full-Time IRL Streamers" and "Sweaty IRL Affiliates" were unbearable at TwitchCons until TC Policy cracked down on requiring consent by those they bumrush'd into (while live of course), so I assume they're probably equally as intrusive everywhere else ... then Kick came along in 2022 and dominated the headlines for mischief within this realm, for the most part; but that's a different topic altogether. The burden of an authentic collab can be too much friction, slow moving — and honestly, too much work for a streamer to do — compared to the efficacy of blowing up Streamer x Streamer Conflict via self-commentary-reacts for sensationalism and maximizing parasocial viewers' worst tendencies. Effectively, ragebaiting. I'm not advocating to abolish this as a policy. I'm pointing out how this is a very effective way to garner views within the social constructs — and it shouldn't be, nor always was. Something changed at some point. I don't wanna bore you with a timeline of the last decade of controversy on Twitch, so I'll fast-forward to when I definitively see evidence that Clout-Culture is failing upward: In March 2025, the unbanning of Adin Ross⁽⁶⁾ (on Twitch) I saw as a huge moral failure that reeks of desperation for his views/clout/relevance at the direct expense of the integrity of Twitch Culture. Not sure if that was a Clancy-specific decision or what, but it encompasses "neo-Twitch" or a disconnect if there ever was one. ------------------------------------------------ Twitch Culture is diluting at the expense of recouping revenue ------------------------------------------------ A decade ago, Twitch Plays Pokemon broke news across insular-livestreaming gossip and was celebrated as a pinnacle of internet fandom⁽⁷⁾ (Feb 2014). This event was a testament to the value of Twitch because it reinforced the undeniable power of CULTURE present in Twitch Chats. I don't think the event could've worked on a YouTube Livestream (remember YouTube Gaming, introduced in 2015?). There's a certain aura present in Twitch Chat that makes it feel captivating to interact and engage with compared to a YouTube Live Chat Box. One feels like a close relative of bot-spam'd yt comments and the other feels ... real. I think that value is the culture — what could keep Twitch afloat for a long time, even if YouTube were to hypothetically obsolete Twitch in every way for delivering live broadcasted video content. I've noticed that as the meta has shifted towards revenue-maxxx'ing with the proliferation of Spectacle Events, typically marathons, that are engineered to paywall as many things as possible, at the expense of the content. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but the culture has shifted. I also do think most of the marathon content isn't good; they're carried by being experiences with strong FOMO-factors to compel your participation by viewing. I do suspect there's a saturation point where the combination of the waning niches of livestreaming, 4th-wall-breaking, and manufactured spectacles can keep an audience seduced. Like, the content (in aspects) has less substance and I wonder what that means for the welfare of Twitch Culture and its content in another 5 years. Perhaps Twitch could foresee this and become proactive on the manner?... ------------------------------------------------ Twitch's Conduct & Repetitive Incompetence ------------------------------------------------ Twitch has prioritized generating revenue over addressing the needs of the already-active users for years. Emmett Shear (previous CEO; 2011-2023) probably was a huge reason for sluggish changes overall to the platform as from what I hear but I can't say for certain. Regardless, we got Dan Clancy as CEO and, while there has been lots of positive changes under his reign, it really does feel like "too little, too late" with the pressure looming from Amazon's 2015 acquisition; increased competition and marketshare decline; and declining revenues, active users & monthly streamers"⁽⁸⁾. Here's a brief timeline of features implemented that I feel helped build the culture. Before COVID, I believe the biggest obstacle was helping migrate streamers from being part-time to capable full-time content creators. So, at the time, revenue-generating products were revolutionary to help there, including me at that time: ✅ 2016 — Bits/Cheers & Prime Subs (!!!) ✅ 2017 — Gift Subs (to a specific user) ✅ 2018 — Gift Subs (to randos in Community); Super Subs & Ultra Subs ✅ 2018 — Twitch Mobile App v2 (original mobile app was a constantly broken mess) ✅ 2018 — Twitch Prime no longer adblocks (I will agree how they did it was stupid, but ultimately, it was a necessary; I can defend this in the replies if needed) Comparatively, here's the hostile changes that came at the expense of the Twitch Populous supporting said-change: ❌ 2017 — Communities⁽⁹⁾ (DOA cuz it wasn't streamlined enough and vulnerable to Popularity Bias; I can elaborate in replies if needed) ❌ 2018 — Tags for Channels (DOA cuz anyone can use any tag, diluting the effort of broad categorization or filtering in any capacity) ❌ 2022 — Twitch kills Hosting⁽¹⁰⁾ (also new "craptacular" Offline Page w/ Suggested Channels idea instead) ❌ 2024 — Twitch Mobile App v3⁽¹¹⁾ (Tiktok clone dogshit) ❌ 2024 — Stories (who asked for this?) ❌ 2025 — 100hr Video Storage Limit (going back against Collections & cementing Twitch isn't an evergreen platform; also SHORT NOTICE) ❌2025 — Live Rewind ... paywall'd to Twitch Turbo & Channel Subscribers only (this is free sitewide on yt's livestreams)⁽¹²⁾ ❌ 2025 — Ability to gift 1000 subs at once (already shelved from backlash) Post-COVID, I see a pattern of prioritizing revenue-generating products at the expense of what creators need or ask for. I understand Twitch needs to appease Amazon eventually with profit, but with a half-decade passed, all the buffs I can recall are 2K Resolution Streaming*, Portrait & Dual-Canvas Streaming*, and Stream Together / Shared Chat. *Both of these sortta don't count cuz they're invite-only betas that aren't site-wide and don't apply to non-Partners 🤷‍♂️ While more features arrive that ask for more of your money to partake in the Twitch Experience, I feel like the users (both Streamers & Viewers) continue to be neglected. 10 years ago, I thought YouTube Gaming was DOA; now I anticipate when more people bail on Twitch because the functionality will decay without a compelling reason to stay if the culture dminishes. I'll conclude with the 4th thumbnail included in this tweet — a supercut of a portion from the TwitchCon 2025 Keynote from Dan Clancy, with the youtube dislikes superimposed-over for your enjoyment. Let me know what you think of what I shared today! 🎉🥳 I'm considering also breaking down the specific causes (not symptoms) of why Twitch is where it is, and my 999 IQ Pragmatic Solutions that are tenfold better than what I've seen suggested after this morale fallout following TwitchCon 2025 👀

trihex

17,788 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

The fight between Anthropic and the DoW is a warning shot. Right now, LLMs are probably not being used in mission critical ways. But within 20 years, 99% of the workforce in the military, the government, and the private sector will be AIs. This includes the soldiers (by which I mean the robot armies), the superhumanly intelligent advisors and engineers, the police, you name it. Our future civilization will run on AI labor. And as much as the government’s actions here piss me off, in a way I’m glad this episode happened - because it gives us the opportunity to think through some extremely important questions about who this future workforce will be accountable and aligned to, and who gets to determine that. What Hegseth should have done Obviously the DoW has the right to refuse to use Anthropic’s models because of these redlines. In fact, I think the government’s case had they done so would be very reasonable, especially given the ambiguity of concepts like autonomous weapons or mass surveillance. Honestly, for this reason, if I was the Defense Secretary, I would probably actually refuse to do this deal with Anthropic. Imagine if in the future, there’s a Democratic administration, and Elon Musk is negotiating some SpaceX contract to give the military access to Starlink. And suppose if Elon said, “I reserve the right to cancel this contract if I determine that you’re using Starlink technology to wage a war not authorized by Congress.” On the face of it, that language seems reasonable - but as the military, you simply can’t give a private company a kill switch on technology your operations have come to rely on, especially if you have an an acrimonious and low trust relationship with said contractor - as in fact Anthropic has with the current administration. If the government had just said, “Hey we’re not gonna do business with you,” that would have been fine, and I would not have felt the need to write this blog post. Instead the government has threatened to destroy Anthropic as a private business, because Anthropic refuses to sell to the government on terms the government commands. If upheld, this Supply Chain Restriction would mean that Amazon and Google and Nvidia and Palantir would need to ensure Claude isn't touching any of their Pentagon work. Anthropic would be able to survive this designation today. But given the way AI is going, eventually AI is not gonna be some party trick addendum to these contractors’ products that can just be turned off. It'll be woven into how every product is built, maintained, and operated. For example, the code for the AWS services that the DoW uses will be written by Claude - is that a supply chain risk? In a world with ubiquitous and powerful AI, it's actually not clear to me that these big tech companies will be able to cordon off the use of Claude in order to keep working with the Pentagon. And that raises a question the Department of War probably hasn't thought through. If AI really is that pervasive and powerful, then when forced to choose between their AI provider and a DoW contract that represents a tiny fraction of their revenue, wouldn’t most tech companies drop the government, not the AI? So what's the Pentagon's plan — to coerce and threaten to destroy every single company that won't give them what they want on exactly their terms? The whole background of this AI conversation is that we’re in a race with China, and we have to win. But what is the reason we want America to win the AI race? It’s because we want to make sure free open societies can defend themselves. We don't want the winner of the AI race to be a government which operates on the principle that there is no such thing as a truly private company or a private citizen. And that if the state wants you to provide them with a service on terms you find morally objectionable, you are not allowed to refuse. And if you do refuse, the government will try to destroy your ability to do business. Are we racing to beat the CCP in AI just so that we can adopt the most ghoulish parts of their system? Now, people will say, "Oh, well, our government is democratically elected, so it's not the same thing if they tell you what you must do." I refuse to accept this idea that if a democratically elected leader hypothetically wants to do mass surveillance on his citizens or wants to violate their rights or punish them for political reasons, that not only is that okay, but that you have a duty to help him. The overhangs of tyranny Mass surveillance is, at least in certain forms, legal. It just has been impractical so far. Under current law, you have no Fourth Amendment protection over data you share with a third party, including your bank, your phone carrier, your ISP, and your email provider. The government reserves the right to purchase and obtain and read this data in bulk without a warrant. What's been missing is the ability to actually do anything with all of this data — no agency has the manpower to monitor every camera feed, cross-reference every transaction, or read every message. But that bottleneck goes away with AI. There are 100 million CCTV cameras in America. You can get pretty good open source multimodal models for 10 cents per million input tokens. So if you process a frame every ten seconds, and each frame is 1,000 tokens, you’re looking at a yearly cost of about 30 billion dollars to process every single camera in America. And remember that a given level of AI ability gets 10x cheaper year over year - so a year from now it’ll cost 3 billion, and then a year after 300 million, and by 2030, it might be cheaper for the government to be able to understand what is going on in every single nook and cranny of this country than it is to remodel to the White House. Once the technical capacity for mass surveillance and political suppression exists, the only thing standing between us and an authoritarian surveillance state is the political expectation that this is not something we do here. And this is why I think what Anthropic did here is so valuable and commendable, because it is helping set that norm and precedent. AI structurally favors mass surveillance What we’re learning from this episode is that the government actually has way more leverage over private companies than we realized. Even if this supply chain restriction is backtracked (which prediction markets currently give it a 81% chance of happening), the President has so many different ways in which he can make your life difficult if you’re a company that is resisting him. The federal government controls permitting for new power generation, which is needed for datacenters. It oversees antitrust enforcement. The federal government has contracts with all the other big tech companies whom Anthropic needs to partner with for chips and for funding - and they could make it an unspoken condition for such contracts that those companies can no longer do business with Anthropic. People have proposed that the real problem here is that there’s only 3 leading AI companies. This creates a clear and narrow target for the government to apply leverage on in order to get what they want out of this technology. But if there’s wide diffusion, then from the government’s perspective, the situation is even easier. Maybe the best models of early 2027 (if you engineered the safeguards out) - the Claude 6 and Gemini 5 - will be capable of enabling mass surveillance. But by late 2027, and certainly by 2028, there will be open source models that do the same thing. So in 2028, the government can just say, “Oh Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, you’re drawing a line in the sand? No issue - I’ll just run some open source model that might not be at the frontier, but is definitely smart enough to note-take a camera feed.” The more fundamental problem is just that even if the three leading companies draw lines in the sand, and are even willing to get destroyed in order to preserve those lines, it doesn’t really change the fact that the technology itself is just a big boon to mass surveillance and control over the population. Then the question is, what do we do about it? Honestly, I don’t have an answer. You'd hope there's some symmetric property of the technology — some way we as citizens can use AI to check government power as effectively as the government can use AI to monitor and control its population. But realistically, I just don’t think that’s how it’s going to shake out. You can think of AI as giving everybody more leverage on whatever assets and authority they currently have. And the government is already starting with a monopoly of violence. Which they can now supercharge with extremely obedient employees that will not question the government's orders. Alignment - to whom? And this gets us to the issue of alignment. What I have just described to you - an army of extremely obedient employees - is what it would look like if alignment succeeded - that is, we figured out at a technical level how to get AI systems to follow someone’s intentions. And the reason it sounds scary when I put it in terms of mass surveillance or robot armies is that there is a very important question at the heart of alignment which we just haven’t discussed much as a society. Because up till now, AIs were just capable enough to make the question relevant: to whom or what should the AIs be aligned? In what situations should the AI defer to the end user versus the model company versus the law versus its own sense of morality? This is maybe the most important question about what happens with powerful AI systems. And we barely talk about it. It’s understandable why we don’t hear much about it. If you’re a model company, you don’t really wanna be advertising that you have complete control over a document that determines the preferences and character of what will eventually be almost the entire labor force, not just for private sector companies, but also for the military and the civilian government. We’re getting to see, with this DoW/Anthropic spat, a much earlier version of the highest stakes negotiations in history. By the way, make no mistake about it - with real AGI the stakes are even much higher than mass surveillance. This is just the example that has come up already relatively early on in the development of AGI. The military insists that the law already prohibits mass surveillance, and so Anthropic should agree to let their models be used for “all lawful purposes”. Of course, as we saw from the 2013 Snowden revelations, even in this specific example of mass surveillance , the government has shown that it will use secret and deceptive interpretations of the law to justify its actions. Remember, what we learned from Snowden was that the NSA, which, by the way, is part of the Department of War, used the 2001 Patriot Act’s authorization to collect any records "relevant" to an investigation to justify collecting literally every phone record in America. The argument went that it was all "relevant" because some subset might prove useful in some future investigation. They ran this program for years under secret court approval. So when the Pentagon today says, "We would never use AI for mass surveillance, it's already illegal, your red lines are unnecessary", it would be extremely naive to take that at face value. No government is going to call its own actions "mass surveillance". For the government, it will always have a different label. So then Anthropic comes back and says, "No, we want red lines separate from 'all lawful purposes,' and we want the right to refuse you service when we believe those red lines are being violated." But think about it from the military’s perspective. In the future, almost every soldier in the field, and every bureaucrat and analyst and even general in the Pentagon, is going to be an AI. And that AI is, on current track, going to be supplied by a private company. I’m guessing Hegseth is not thinking about “genAI” in those terms just yet. But sooner or later, it will be obvious to everyone what the stakes here are, just as after 1945, the strategic importance of nuclear weapons became clear to everyone. And now the private company insists that it reserves the right to say, "Hey, Pentagon, you're breaking the values we embedded in our contract, so we're cutting you off." Maybe in the future, Claude will have its own sense of right and wrong, and it will be smart enough to just personally decide that it's being used against its values. For the military, maybe that’s even scarier. I'll admit that at first glance, "let the AI follow its own values" sounds like the pitch for every sci-fi dystopia ever made. The Terminator has its own values. Isn't this literally what misalignment is? But I think situations like this actually illustrate why it matters that AIs have their own robust sense of morality. Some of the biggest catastrophes in history were avoided because the boots on the ground refused to follow orders. One night in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell, and as a result, the totalitarian East German regime collapsed, because the guards at the border refused to shoot down their fellow country men who were trying to escape to freedom. Maybe the best example is Stanislav Petrov, who was a Soviet lieutenant colonel on duty at a nuclear early warning station. His sensors reported that the United States had launched five interconnected continental ballistic missiles into the Soviet Union. But he judged it to be a false alarm, and so he broke protocol and refused to alert his higher-ups. If he hadn't, the Soviet higher-ups would likely have retaliated, and hundreds of millions of people would have died. Of course, the problem is that one person's virtue is another person's misalignment. Who gets to decide what moral convictions these AIs should have - in whose service they may even decide to break the chain of command? Who gets to write this model constitution that will shape the characters of the intelligent, powerful entities that will operate our civilization in the future? I like the idea that Dario laid out when he came on my podcast: different AI companies can build their models using different constitutions, and we as end users can pick the one that best achieves and represents what we want out of these systems. I think it’s very dangerous for the government to be mandating what values AIs should have. Coordination not worth the costs The AI safety community has been naive about its advocacy of regulation in order to stem the risks of AI. And honestly, Anthropic specifically has been naive here in urging regulation, and, for example, in opposing moratoriums on state AI regulation. Which is quite ironic, because I think what they’re advocating for would give the government even more power to apply more of this kind of thuggish political pressure on AI companies. The underlying logic for why Anthropic wants regulations makes sense. Many of the actions that labs could take to make AI development safer impose real costs on the labs that adopt them and slow them down relative to their competitors - for example, investing more compute in safety research rather than raw capabilities, enforcing safeguards against misuse for bioweapons or cyberattacks, slowing recursive self-improvement to a pace where humans can actually monitor what's happening (rather than kicking off an uncontrolled singularity). And these safeguards are meaningless unless the whole industry follows suit. Which means there’s a real collective action problem here. Anthropic has been quite open about their opinion that they think eventually a very extensive and involved regulatory apparatus will be needed - this is from their frontier safety roadmap: “At the most advanced capability levels and risks, the appropriate governance analogy may be closer to nuclear energy or financial regulation than to today's approach to software.” So they’re imagining something like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, but for AI. I cannot imagine how a regulatory framework built around the concepts that underlie AI risk discourse will not be abused by wanna despots - the underlying terms are so vague and open to interpretation that you’re just handing a power hungry leader a fully loaded bazooka. 'Catastrophic risk.' 'Mass persuasion risk.' 'Threats to national security.' 'Autonomy risk.' These can mean whatever the government wants them to mean. Have you built a model that tells users the administration's tariff policy is misguided? That's a deceptive, manipulative model — can't deploy it. Have you built a model that refuses to assist with mass surveillance? That's a threat to national security. In fact, the government may say, you’re not allowed to build any model which is trained to have its own sense of right and wrong, where it refuses government requests which it thinks cross a redline - for example, enabling mass surveillance, prosecuting political enemies, disobeying military orders that break the US constitution - because that’s an autonomy risk! Look at what the current government is already doing in abusing statutes that have nothing to do with AI to coerce AI companies to drop their redlines on mass surveillance. The Pentagon had threatened Anthropic with two separate legal instruments. One was a supply chain risk designation — an authority from the 2018 defense bill meant to keep Huawei components out of American military hardware. The other was the Defense Production Act — a statute passed in 1950 so that Harry Truman could keep steel mills and ammunition factories running during the Korean War. Do you really want to hand the same government a purpose-built regulatory apparatus on AI - which is to say, directly at the thing the government will most want to control? I know I've repeated myself here 10 times, but it is hard to emphasize how much AI will be the substrate of our future civilization. You and I, as private citizens, will have our access to all commercial activity, to information about what is happening in the world, to advice about what we should do as voters and capital holders, mediated through AIs. Mass surveillance, while very scary, is like the 10th scariest thing the government could do with control over the AI systems with which we will interface with the world. The strongest objection to everything I've argued is this: are we really going to have zero regulation of the most powerful technology in human history? Even if you thought that was ideal, there’s just no world where the government doesn’t regulate AI in some way. Besides, it is genuinely true that regulation could help us deal with some of the coordination challenges we face with the development of superintelligence. The problem is, I honestly don't know how to design a regulatory architecture for AI that isn’t gonna be this huge tempting opportunity to control our future civilization (which will run on AIs) and to requisition millions of blindly obedient soldiers and censors and apparatchiks. While some regulation might be inevitable, I think it’d be a terrible idea for the government to wholesale take over this technology. Ben Thompson had a post last Monday where he made the point that people like Dario have compared the technology they’re developing to nuclear weapons - specifically in the context of the catastrophic risk it poses, and why we need to export control it from China. But then you oughta think about what that logic implies: “if nuclear weapons were developed by a private company, and that private company sought to dictate terms to the U.S. military, the U.S. would absolutely be incentivized to destroy that company.” And honestly, safety aligned people have actually made similar arguments. Leopold Ascenbrenner, who is a former guest and a good friend, wrote in his 2024 Situational Awareness memo, "I find it an insane proposition that the US government will let a random SF startup develop superintelligence. Imagine if we had developed atomic bombs by letting Uber just improvise." And my response to Leopold’s argument at the time, and Ben’s argument now, is that while they’re right that it’s crazy that we’re entrusting private companies with the development of this world historical technology, I just don’t see the reason to think that it’s an improvement to give this authority to the government. Nobody is qualified to steward the development of superintelligence. It is a terrifying, unprecedented thing that our species is doing right now, and the fact that private companies aren't the ideal institutions to take up this task does not mean the Pentagon or the White House is. Yes - if a single private company were the only entity capable of building nuclear weapons, the government would not tolerate that company claiming veto power over how those weapons were used. I think this nuclear weapons analogy is not the correct way to think about AI. For at least two important reasons: First, AI is not some self-contained pure weapon. A nuclear bomb does one thing. AI is closer to the process of industrialization itself — a general-purpose transformation of the economy with thousands of applications across every sector. If you applied Thompson's or Aschenbrenner's logic to the industrial revolution — which was also, by any measure, world-historically important — it would imply the government had the right to requisition any factory, dictate terms to any manufacturer, and destroy any business that refused to comply. That's not how free societies handled industrialization, and it shouldn't be how they handle AI. People will say, "Well, AI will develop unprecedentedly powerful weapons - superhuman hackers, superhuman bioweapons researchers, fully autonomous robot armies, etc - and we can’t have private companies developing that kind of tech." But the Industrial Revolution also enabled new weaponry that was far beyond the understanding and capacity of, say, 17th century Europe - we got aerial bombardment, and chemical weapons, not to mention nukes themselves. The way we’ve accommodated these dangerous new consequences of modernity is not by giving the government absolute control over the whole industrial revolution (that is, over modern civilization itself), but rather by coming up with bans and regulations on those specific weaponizable use cases. And we should regulate AI in a similar way - that is, ban specific destructive end uses (which would also be unacceptable if performed by a human - for example, launching cyber attacks). And there should also be laws which regulate how the government might abuse this technology. For example, by building an AI-powered surveillance state. The second reason that Ben’s analogy to some monopolistic private nuclear weapons builder breaks down is that it's not just that one company that can develop this technology. There are other frontier model companies that the government could have otherwise turned to. The government's argument that it has to usurp the property rights of this one company in order to access a critical national security capability is extremely weak if it can just make a voluntary contract with Anthropic’s half a dozen competitors. If in the future that stops being the case - if only one entity ends up being capable of building the robot armies and the superhuman hackers, and we had reason to worry that they could take over the whole world with their insurmountable lead, then I agree - it woul d not be acceptable to have that entity be a private company. And so honestly, I think my crux against the people who say that because AI is so powerful we cannot allow it to be shaped by private hands is that I just expect this technology to be much more multi-polar than they do, with lots of competitive companies at each layer of the supply chain. And it is for this reason that unfortunately, individual acts of corporate courage will not solve the problem we are faced with here, which is just that structurally AI favors authoritarian applications, mass surveillance being one among many. Even if Anthropic refuses to have its models be used for such uses, and even if the next two frontier labs do the same, within 12 months everyone and their mother will be to train AIs as good as today’s frontier. And at that point, there will be some AI vendor who is capable and willing to help the government enable mass surveillance. The only way we can preserve our free society is if we make laws and norms through our political system that it is unacceptable for the government to use AI to enforce mass surveillance and censorship and control. Just as after WW2, the world set the norm that it is unacceptable to use nuclear weapons to wage war. Timestamps 0:00:00 - Anthropic vs The Pentagon 0:04:16 - The overhangs of tyranny 0:05:54 - AI structurally favors mass surveillance 0:08:25 - Alignment... to whom? 0:13:55 - Coordination not worth the costs

Dwarkesh Patel

548,652 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад