Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

🔴🚨“𝐓𝐘𝐋𝐄𝐑 𝐈𝐒 𝐀 𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐋 𝐓𝐀𝐋𝐄𝐍𝐓, 𝐀 𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐋 𝐒𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐓 𝐅𝐎𝐎𝐓𝐁𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐄𝐑”🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿😮‍💨-𝐉𝐔𝐑𝐆𝐄𝐍 𝐊𝐋𝐎𝐏𝐏 He is dispossessed less than once every 2 full games what a game vs Angers🤯 Crazy how he would solve most problems at Liverpool rn🥶

The Stat Guy

18,881 subscribers

127,842 views • 5 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🔵🔴🚨 “𝐌𝐘 𝐑𝐎𝐋𝐄 𝐌𝐎𝐃𝐄𝐋 𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐄𝐑𝐑𝐘 𝐇𝐄𝐍𝐑𝐘 𝐈 𝐄𝐍𝐉𝐎𝐘 𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐘𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐀𝐒 𝐀 ‘𝟗’ 𝐌𝐎𝐑𝐄” - 𝐑𝐀𝐒𝐇𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐃 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Rashford As No 9 Has 4 G/A in 4 Games he has 1.24 G/A as CF🤯 Last Time Rashford Played CF he got 2G and 1A🥶

🔵🔴🚨 “𝐌𝐘 𝐑𝐎𝐋𝐄 𝐌𝐎𝐃𝐄𝐋 𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐄𝐑𝐑𝐘 𝐇𝐄𝐍𝐑𝐘 𝐈 𝐄𝐍𝐉𝐎𝐘 𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐘𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐀𝐒 𝐀 ‘𝟗’ 𝐌𝐎𝐑𝐄” - 𝐑𝐀𝐒𝐇𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐃 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Rashford As No 9 Has 4 G/A in 4 Games he has 1.24 G/A as CF🤯 Last Time Rashford Played CF he got 2G and 1A🥶

The Stat Guy

420,531 views • 6 months ago

🚨 THIS KID DID SOMETHING MOST ADULTS WOULDN’T A video is going viral showing a young boy explaining how he spent every dollar of the reward money he earned at school, and it wasn’t on toys, games, or anything for himself. He earns “reward money” at school for good behavior, talks through the fact that he could’ve spent it on whatever he wanted, then casually admits he used all of it to enter a raffle he hoped would win his sister a bike. When his sister realizes what he did, the reaction hits immediately. The comments are split between people saying this kind of choice says everything about how kids are raised, and others saying most adults wouldn’t even make that call. So is this something kids are born with, or something they learn by watching the people around them?

🚨 THIS KID DID SOMETHING MOST ADULTS WOULDN’T A video is going viral showing a young boy explaining how he spent every dollar of the reward money he earned at school, and it wasn’t on toys, games, or anything for himself. He earns “reward money” at school for good behavior, talks through the fact that he could’ve spent it on whatever he wanted, then casually admits he used all of it to enter a raffle he hoped would win his sister a bike. When his sister realizes what he did, the reaction hits immediately. The comments are split between people saying this kind of choice says everything about how kids are raised, and others saying most adults wouldn’t even make that call. So is this something kids are born with, or something they learn by watching the people around them?

HustleBitch

419,500 views • 8 months ago

$Lex Fridman asked Jensen Huang if he is afraid of death. Huang did not flinch. Huang: “The outcome that I seek, that I hope for, is that I die on the job instantaneously.” That is not a figure of speech. That is a man telling you he has already decided how this ends. No retirement. No transition plan. No golden years on a beach somewhere tallying what he built. He wants to be mid-sentence in a meeting the moment his heart gives out. And when you understand why, it changes how you see everything Nvidia is doing. Huang: “This is not a once in a lifetime experience. This is a once in a humanity experience.” Once in a lifetime means others have lived through something comparable. He is saying no one has. Not Edison. Not Ford. Not anyone at Bell Labs or Xerox PARC. The deployment of artificial intelligence at this scale, at this speed, with this much consequence has no precedent in the history of the species. And Huang is sitting at the center of it. That is not ego. That is geography. Nvidia’s chips power virtually every major AI system on Earth right now. He knows what that means. And he treats it with a seriousness most people cannot even summon for their own lives, let alone the trajectory of civilization. Then Lex asked about succession planning. Huang’s answer should be framed on the wall of every founder alive. Huang: “I don’t believe in succession planning.” Not because he thinks he is immortal. Because he thinks it is the wrong question entirely. The right question is what are you doing today to make yourself unnecessary. Huang: “The most important thing you should do today is to pass on knowledge, information, insight, skills, experience as often and continuously as you can.” He does not wait until retirement to hand over what he knows. He does not save his best thinking for a memoir. The second he learns something, it is already moving to someone else on his team. Before he has even finished processing it himself. Huang: “Nothing I learn ever sits on my desk longer than a fraction of a second.” Most executives hoard knowledge. It is how they stay relevant. How they justify the title. How they make themselves impossible to replace. Huang does the opposite. He treats his own mind like a relay station. Information comes in, gets amplified, fires out to every node that needs it. Every meeting is a transfer. Every conversation is a download. The goal is not to be the smartest person in the building. The goal is to make the building smarter than any one person in it. That is why he does not need a succession plan. If you spend every day making the people around you capable of running without you, the org never notices the moment you are gone. Your fingerprints are in how they think. But he is not planning to leave. Huang: “I really don’t want to die. I have a great life. I have a great family. I have really important work.” No drama. No existential spiral. Just a man who looked at death and filed it under problems that can wait. There is still too much to build. The people planning their exit strategies are playing a different game than Jensen Huang. He is not building a company he can walk away from. He is building one that outlasts his heartbeat because every person inside it already thinks in patterns he installed. That is not a death wish. That is a man who found the only thing worth doing and refused to do anything else.$

Lex Fridman asked Jensen Huang if he is afraid of death. Huang did not flinch. Huang: “The outcome that I seek, that I hope for, is that I die on the job instantaneously.” That is not a figure of speech. That is a man telling you he has already decided how this ends. No retirement. No transition plan. No golden years on a beach somewhere tallying what he built. He wants to be mid-sentence in a meeting the moment his heart gives out. And when you understand why, it changes how you see everything Nvidia is doing. Huang: “This is not a once in a lifetime experience. This is a once in a humanity experience.” Once in a lifetime means others have lived through something comparable. He is saying no one has. Not Edison. Not Ford. Not anyone at Bell Labs or Xerox PARC. The deployment of artificial intelligence at this scale, at this speed, with this much consequence has no precedent in the history of the species. And Huang is sitting at the center of it. That is not ego. That is geography. Nvidia’s chips power virtually every major AI system on Earth right now. He knows what that means. And he treats it with a seriousness most people cannot even summon for their own lives, let alone the trajectory of civilization. Then Lex asked about succession planning. Huang’s answer should be framed on the wall of every founder alive. Huang: “I don’t believe in succession planning.” Not because he thinks he is immortal. Because he thinks it is the wrong question entirely. The right question is what are you doing today to make yourself unnecessary. Huang: “The most important thing you should do today is to pass on knowledge, information, insight, skills, experience as often and continuously as you can.” He does not wait until retirement to hand over what he knows. He does not save his best thinking for a memoir. The second he learns something, it is already moving to someone else on his team. Before he has even finished processing it himself. Huang: “Nothing I learn ever sits on my desk longer than a fraction of a second.” Most executives hoard knowledge. It is how they stay relevant. How they justify the title. How they make themselves impossible to replace. Huang does the opposite. He treats his own mind like a relay station. Information comes in, gets amplified, fires out to every node that needs it. Every meeting is a transfer. Every conversation is a download. The goal is not to be the smartest person in the building. The goal is to make the building smarter than any one person in it. That is why he does not need a succession plan. If you spend every day making the people around you capable of running without you, the org never notices the moment you are gone. Your fingerprints are in how they think. But he is not planning to leave. Huang: “I really don’t want to die. I have a great life. I have a great family. I have really important work.” No drama. No existential spiral. Just a man who looked at death and filed it under problems that can wait. There is still too much to build. The people planning their exit strategies are playing a different game than Jensen Huang. He is not building a company he can walk away from. He is building one that outlasts his heartbeat because every person inside it already thinks in patterns he installed. That is not a death wish. That is a man who found the only thing worth doing and refused to do anything else.

Dustin

25,617 views • 5 months ago

🎙️ Bill Simmons: "LaMelo Ball is a real winner this season." "He's actually had seasons with better 'stats.' This is a classic eye test; you have to watch it. I love the way he's playing... there's real thoughtfulness in how he's playing the point guard position now and how he's not as risky and reckless as he was. He doesn't seem like he's in an AND1 tournament anymore." "There's a wherewithal with what he's doing now and how he understands, they have these two incredible wings... Kon Knueppel has a chance to get 300 made threes, which would be nuts. Brandon Miller, when you watch him, this is like the best version of Paul George in the 2010s. And LaMelo's really good at using them, at using Moussa Diabate... he just knows how to drive the (Hornets) car." 🎙️ Zach Lowe: "Everybody got so disgusted with the 5-6 crazy things he would do every game that they unjustifiably dismissed all the statistical indicators that he was actually good and actually was driving Charlotte's offense at a high level when he was on the floor." Full episode: — —

🎙️ Bill Simmons: "LaMelo Ball is a real winner this season." "He's actually had seasons with better 'stats.' This is a classic eye test; you have to watch it. I love the way he's playing... there's real thoughtfulness in how he's playing the point guard position now and how he's not as risky and reckless as he was. He doesn't seem like he's in an AND1 tournament anymore." "There's a wherewithal with what he's doing now and how he understands, they have these two incredible wings... Kon Knueppel has a chance to get 300 made threes, which would be nuts. Brandon Miller, when you watch him, this is like the best version of Paul George in the 2010s. And LaMelo's really good at using them, at using Moussa Diabate... he just knows how to drive the (Hornets) car." 🎙️ Zach Lowe: "Everybody got so disgusted with the 5-6 crazy things he would do every game that they unjustifiably dismissed all the statistical indicators that he was actually good and actually was driving Charlotte's offense at a high level when he was on the floor." Full episode: — —

r/CharlotteHornets

62,208 views • 5 months ago

THIS GUY VIBE CODED A FULL CAPYBARA FOOD DELIVERY GAME IN 2 WEEKS WITH CLAUDE CODE you play as a capybara delivering food on a bike. orders stack on the back, you have a phone with apps in-game and the whole delivery system is realistic 2 weeks, zero game dev experience, and ENTIRELY AI generated the full stack: > claude code for all the code > three.js for the 3D engine > suno for original music > elevenlabs for sound effects and voice > GPT images-2 and grok for textures and illustrations > tripo3d for generating all the 3D assets the cinematics are all in-game too. he asked claude to build a cinematic editor with timeline controls, camera animation, and transitions. then he just placed the cameras himself his workflow was more planning than coding (obviously): > come up with the core mechanic > plan every feature using claude /plan mode > generate assets with AI tools > spend most of his time on the final polish, prop placement, and making the design feel right he said the human part is what most vibe coded games are missing. AI can generate everything but having taste for what looks good and what feels right is still on you the game is playable right now in the browser this is what vibe coding is actually capable of in the game dev space right now a year ago this would have taken a small team of developers, a sound designer, and an artist working together for months now one person with no experience can ship a polished playable game with story, music, and mechanics in 14 days the tools keep getting better and the barrier to making real games keeps getting lower

THIS GUY VIBE CODED A FULL CAPYBARA FOOD DELIVERY GAME IN 2 WEEKS WITH CLAUDE CODE you play as a capybara delivering food on a bike. orders stack on the back, you have a phone with apps in-game and the whole delivery system is realistic 2 weeks, zero game dev experience, and ENTIRELY AI generated the full stack: > claude code for all the code > three.js for the 3D engine > suno for original music > elevenlabs for sound effects and voice > GPT images-2 and grok for textures and illustrations > tripo3d for generating all the 3D assets the cinematics are all in-game too. he asked claude to build a cinematic editor with timeline controls, camera animation, and transitions. then he just placed the cameras himself his workflow was more planning than coding (obviously): > come up with the core mechanic > plan every feature using claude /plan mode > generate assets with AI tools > spend most of his time on the final polish, prop placement, and making the design feel right he said the human part is what most vibe coded games are missing. AI can generate everything but having taste for what looks good and what feels right is still on you the game is playable right now in the browser this is what vibe coding is actually capable of in the game dev space right now a year ago this would have taken a small team of developers, a sound designer, and an artist working together for months now one person with no experience can ship a polished playable game with story, music, and mechanics in 14 days the tools keep getting better and the barrier to making real games keeps getting lower

Om Patel

241,709 views • 4 months ago

🔴 Wayne Rooney was asked to choose between Lisandro Martínez and Ayden Heaven. 🗣️ "What I can’t believe is how young Heaven is. He was just bought for £1m and he's already playing at a very high level. I would love to see him start every match so he can continue to improve. With more game time, he will reach his full potential and probably become one of the best young defenders in the top 5 leagues. He plays with so much confidence and his composure is top-tier. I remember his game against Chelsea him and Mazraoui in that defense were incredible. That kid played like he's been doing this for years. I want to see him get consistent minutes so we can secure the future of the club's defense."

🔴 Wayne Rooney was asked to choose between Lisandro Martínez and Ayden Heaven. 🗣️ "What I can’t believe is how young Heaven is. He was just bought for £1m and he's already playing at a very high level. I would love to see him start every match so he can continue to improve. With more game time, he will reach his full potential and probably become one of the best young defenders in the top 5 leagues. He plays with so much confidence and his composure is top-tier. I remember his game against Chelsea him and Mazraoui in that defense were incredible. That kid played like he's been doing this for years. I want to see him get consistent minutes so we can secure the future of the club's defense."

(Fan) United Jnr ❤️

197,823 views • 2 months ago

🚨Pep Guardiola on facing Mo Salah through the years and his achievements. 🗣️“Mo Salah is the only player I’ve always advice my players about when facing Liverpool, we speak more often about how we to stop him in a crucial game but that look crazy and impossible to do, he always finds a way to deal with the pressure that comes to him.” “With him showing off his trophy cabinet on the media wasn’t a brag or mockery, I think young players will learn and work hard to achieve what he has in the cabinet, full of glory and respect that every player will love to have in their career.” “The premier league will always remember him as a legend, how he consistently show up in the charts of the league every season, scoring and assisting for his club to win trophies, you don’t see this sacrifices in every player that plays football and that’s the difference between him and others.” One time after a game I told him I wish he was playing for my club and he just smile and shake hands with me.

🚨Pep Guardiola on facing Mo Salah through the years and his achievements. 🗣️“Mo Salah is the only player I’ve always advice my players about when facing Liverpool, we speak more often about how we to stop him in a crucial game but that look crazy and impossible to do, he always finds a way to deal with the pressure that comes to him.” “With him showing off his trophy cabinet on the media wasn’t a brag or mockery, I think young players will learn and work hard to achieve what he has in the cabinet, full of glory and respect that every player will love to have in their career.” “The premier league will always remember him as a legend, how he consistently show up in the charts of the league every season, scoring and assisting for his club to win trophies, you don’t see this sacrifices in every player that plays football and that’s the difference between him and others.” One time after a game I told him I wish he was playing for my club and he just smile and shake hands with me.

Inside Reality Football

19,943 views • 1 month ago

Professor David Clements, once a Never Trumper, highlights four key reasons he will Not turn on President Trump right now 1. If Trump was bad, evil would not try to kill him 2. If Trump did not threaten the old order, the bot press would not lie about him every hour of every day 3. A man cannot be the servant of evil if his mere being has woken more people to the face of evil than any other thing in our time 4. No man can play the deep game, and at the same time be led around by the nose like a fool Number 3 is spot on… His full Substack

Professor David Clements, once a Never Trumper, highlights four key reasons he will Not turn on President Trump right now 1. If Trump was bad, evil would not try to kill him 2. If Trump did not threaten the old order, the bot press would not lie about him every hour of every day 3. A man cannot be the servant of evil if his mere being has woken more people to the face of evil than any other thing in our time 4. No man can play the deep game, and at the same time be led around by the nose like a fool Number 3 is spot on… His full Substack

MJTruthUltra

270,604 views • 5 months ago

Elon Musk explained how he makes every decision in a single sentence. Musk: “Whatever the limiting factor is on speed, I’m gonna attack that.” Not manage it. Not commission a study on it. Not make peace with it. Attack it. Musk: “If capital is a limiting factor, then I’ll solve for capital. If it’s not a limiting factor, I’ll solve for something else.” Sounds simple. It’s the furthest thing from simple. The entire professional class is built on the opposite instinct. They identify the constraint. Then they build a career around managing it. They become the expert on why things can’t move faster. Why it’s too expensive. Too risky. Too early. They don’t solve for the limiting factor. They become the limiting factor. And they get promoted for it. The biggest bottleneck in most organizations isn’t capital. Isn’t technology. Isn’t regulation. It’s the person in the room whose entire identity depends on the problem staying unsolved. Because once the problem is solved, so is their job title. Musk doesn’t manage that loop. He breaks it. He asks the one question the room agreed to stop asking. Why is this the speed. Why is this the cost. Why is this the timeline. And when the only answer is “because that’s how we’ve always done it”… He knows he’s found the real constraint. The human one. This is why he operates across rockets, cars, AI, brain interfaces, tunnels, and social media at once. Not because he’s reckless. Because the method works everywhere. Find the bottleneck. Solve for it. Move to the next one. Repeat until physics stops you. Not politics. Not bureaucracy. Not consensus. Physics. Most people never get anywhere near the physics. They stop at the first human objection and treat it like a law of nature. Musk treats human objections as engineering problems. That’s what his competitors can’t solve for. Not his capital. Not his reach. He refuses to honor the constraints they’ve spent entire careers respecting. And once you watch someone walk straight through the wall you built your whole life around… You don’t just question the wall. You question everything you built against it.

Elon Musk explained how he makes every decision in a single sentence. Musk: “Whatever the limiting factor is on speed, I’m gonna attack that.” Not manage it. Not commission a study on it. Not make peace with it. Attack it. Musk: “If capital is a limiting factor, then I’ll solve for capital. If it’s not a limiting factor, I’ll solve for something else.” Sounds simple. It’s the furthest thing from simple. The entire professional class is built on the opposite instinct. They identify the constraint. Then they build a career around managing it. They become the expert on why things can’t move faster. Why it’s too expensive. Too risky. Too early. They don’t solve for the limiting factor. They become the limiting factor. And they get promoted for it. The biggest bottleneck in most organizations isn’t capital. Isn’t technology. Isn’t regulation. It’s the person in the room whose entire identity depends on the problem staying unsolved. Because once the problem is solved, so is their job title. Musk doesn’t manage that loop. He breaks it. He asks the one question the room agreed to stop asking. Why is this the speed. Why is this the cost. Why is this the timeline. And when the only answer is “because that’s how we’ve always done it”… He knows he’s found the real constraint. The human one. This is why he operates across rockets, cars, AI, brain interfaces, tunnels, and social media at once. Not because he’s reckless. Because the method works everywhere. Find the bottleneck. Solve for it. Move to the next one. Repeat until physics stops you. Not politics. Not bureaucracy. Not consensus. Physics. Most people never get anywhere near the physics. They stop at the first human objection and treat it like a law of nature. Musk treats human objections as engineering problems. That’s what his competitors can’t solve for. Not his capital. Not his reach. He refuses to honor the constraints they’ve spent entire careers respecting. And once you watch someone walk straight through the wall you built your whole life around… You don’t just question the wall. You question everything you built against it.

Dustin

71,784 views • 4 months ago

Jensen Huang just reverse-engineered why Elon Musk operates at a speed no one on the planet can match. Three traits. The first is deletion. Huang: “He has the ability to question everything to the point where everything’s down to its minimal amount.” Most engineers solve problems by adding. Musk solves them by subtracting. Every part. Every process. Every assumption that survived because no one had the nerve to kill it. He picks it up. Asks if it’s load-bearing. If the answer is anything less than absolutely, it is gone. Not simplified. Not optimized. Removed. What survives is the skeleton. The bare physics of the problem. Nothing between intent and execution. Huang said it plainly. As minimalist as you could possibly imagine. And he does it at system scale. Not at a product level. Not at a department level. Across entire companies. Entire industries. Entire supply chains. He strips a rocket the same way he strips a meeting. Down to the load-bearing walls and nothing else. The second is presence. Huang: “He is present at the point of action. If there’s a problem, he’ll just go there and show me the problem.” Not a Slack message. Not a report filtered through four layers of people who weren’t there when it broke. He walks to the failure. Stands over it. Puts his hands on it. Most executives have never seen the actual problem their company is trying to solve. They have seen slides about it. Read summaries of it. Formed opinions about it in rooms that are nowhere near it. Musk stands over the broken hardware and does not leave until it works. That collapses the distance that buries most organizations. The gap between something breaking and the person with authority to fix it actually understanding what broke. In most companies, that gap is weeks. For Musk, it is hours. The third is the one that bends everyone around him. Huang: “When you act personally with so much urgency, it causes everybody else to act with urgency.” Every supplier has a hundred customers. Every vendor has a dozen priorities. Every manufacturer has a backlog stretching months into the future. Musk makes himself the top of every single one of those lists. Not by demanding it. By demonstrating it. When the CEO shows up at your facility at midnight. When he is moving faster than your own internal team. When his timeline makes yours look like a suggestion. You do not put him in the queue. You rearrange the queue around him. Huang watched this up close. Huang: “He does that by demonstrating.” Not by asking. Not by negotiating. Not by leveraging a contract clause. By moving so fast that everyone else’s normal pace feels like standing still. Three traits. Strip everything down. Show up at the failure. Move so fast the world rearranges around you. That is not a management philosophy. That is why one man runs six companies while entire boards cannot keep one moving.

Jensen Huang just reverse-engineered why Elon Musk operates at a speed no one on the planet can match. Three traits. The first is deletion. Huang: “He has the ability to question everything to the point where everything’s down to its minimal amount.” Most engineers solve problems by adding. Musk solves them by subtracting. Every part. Every process. Every assumption that survived because no one had the nerve to kill it. He picks it up. Asks if it’s load-bearing. If the answer is anything less than absolutely, it is gone. Not simplified. Not optimized. Removed. What survives is the skeleton. The bare physics of the problem. Nothing between intent and execution. Huang said it plainly. As minimalist as you could possibly imagine. And he does it at system scale. Not at a product level. Not at a department level. Across entire companies. Entire industries. Entire supply chains. He strips a rocket the same way he strips a meeting. Down to the load-bearing walls and nothing else. The second is presence. Huang: “He is present at the point of action. If there’s a problem, he’ll just go there and show me the problem.” Not a Slack message. Not a report filtered through four layers of people who weren’t there when it broke. He walks to the failure. Stands over it. Puts his hands on it. Most executives have never seen the actual problem their company is trying to solve. They have seen slides about it. Read summaries of it. Formed opinions about it in rooms that are nowhere near it. Musk stands over the broken hardware and does not leave until it works. That collapses the distance that buries most organizations. The gap between something breaking and the person with authority to fix it actually understanding what broke. In most companies, that gap is weeks. For Musk, it is hours. The third is the one that bends everyone around him. Huang: “When you act personally with so much urgency, it causes everybody else to act with urgency.” Every supplier has a hundred customers. Every vendor has a dozen priorities. Every manufacturer has a backlog stretching months into the future. Musk makes himself the top of every single one of those lists. Not by demanding it. By demonstrating it. When the CEO shows up at your facility at midnight. When he is moving faster than your own internal team. When his timeline makes yours look like a suggestion. You do not put him in the queue. You rearrange the queue around him. Huang watched this up close. Huang: “He does that by demonstrating.” Not by asking. Not by negotiating. Not by leveraging a contract clause. By moving so fast that everyone else’s normal pace feels like standing still. Three traits. Strip everything down. Show up at the failure. Move so fast the world rearranges around you. That is not a management philosophy. That is why one man runs six companies while entire boards cannot keep one moving.

Dustin

780,547 views • 5 months ago

Marc Andreessen explains the "Elon Method" of leadership, and it completely contradicts how most CEOs operate today. Most leaders get bogged down trying to manage every single moving part of their business. But according to Andreessen, Elon's approach is actually the exact opposite: he delegates almost everything. He isn't involved in 99% of what his companies are doing on a daily basis. Instead, his entire focus is hunting for one specific thing: The Bottleneck. In any manufacturing chain, there is always a bottleneck keeping the line from running the way it's supposed to. It could be a lack of raw materials at the beginning, or a shortage of warehouse space at the end. Whatever it is, that bottleneck is holding everything up. Job number one is to remove it and get things flowing again. Elon has universalized this concept. He looks at every company like it's a conceptual assembly line—sometimes a literal one making cars and rockets. He knows that on any given week, there is guaranteed to be one main bottleneck holding his people back. So, what’s the secret to his management paradox? He relentlessly micromanages the solution to that one specific problem. He doesn't need to manage everything else because, by definition, the rest of the company is running better than the bottleneck. Once it's fixed, he moves on to the next biggest problem. But here is the part where most non-technical CEOs would completely fail trying to replicate this method: When Elon identifies the bottleneck, he has zero patience for bureaucracy. He doesn't ask the VP of Engineering to ask the Director to ask the Manager to ask the individual contributor to write a report to be reviewed in three weeks. He would throw that entire chain of command out the window. Instead, he bypasses the middleman completely. He goes straight to the manufacturing line or the software group, personally finds the exact line engineer who actually understands the technical nature of the bottleneck, sits in a room with them, and fixes the problem together.

Marc Andreessen explains the "Elon Method" of leadership, and it completely contradicts how most CEOs operate today. Most leaders get bogged down trying to manage every single moving part of their business. But according to Andreessen, Elon's approach is actually the exact opposite: he delegates almost everything. He isn't involved in 99% of what his companies are doing on a daily basis. Instead, his entire focus is hunting for one specific thing: The Bottleneck. In any manufacturing chain, there is always a bottleneck keeping the line from running the way it's supposed to. It could be a lack of raw materials at the beginning, or a shortage of warehouse space at the end. Whatever it is, that bottleneck is holding everything up. Job number one is to remove it and get things flowing again. Elon has universalized this concept. He looks at every company like it's a conceptual assembly line—sometimes a literal one making cars and rockets. He knows that on any given week, there is guaranteed to be one main bottleneck holding his people back. So, what’s the secret to his management paradox? He relentlessly micromanages the solution to that one specific problem. He doesn't need to manage everything else because, by definition, the rest of the company is running better than the bottleneck. Once it's fixed, he moves on to the next biggest problem. But here is the part where most non-technical CEOs would completely fail trying to replicate this method: When Elon identifies the bottleneck, he has zero patience for bureaucracy. He doesn't ask the VP of Engineering to ask the Director to ask the Manager to ask the individual contributor to write a report to be reviewed in three weeks. He would throw that entire chain of command out the window. Instead, he bypasses the middleman completely. He goes straight to the manufacturing line or the software group, personally finds the exact line engineer who actually understands the technical nature of the bottleneck, sits in a room with them, and fixes the problem together.

Ian Miles Cheong

71,502 views • 5 months ago

🚨Pep Guardiola was asked about Lionel Messi’s performances at the 2026 FIFA World Cup ahead of Argentina’s final against Spain. 🎙️ Reporter: “Pep, Lionel Messi has once again been one of the standout players of the tournament at 39 years old and now has Argentina one win away from another World Cup. What have you made of his performances?” 🗣️ Pep Guardiola: “People keep asking me how Messi is still doing this at 39. My answer is always the same because football has never seen anyone like him. Age defeats everyone, but somehow it refuses to defeat Lionel Messi. “This World Cup has been another reminder that greatness is not only about speed or physical power. It’s about understanding the game better than everyone else. Leo sees football before it happens. That is why he continues to dominate the biggest matches. “I’ve had the privilege of coaching him, so I know what he is capable of. But even now, he still surprises me. Every touch has a purpose, every pass creates danger, and every decision he makes is the right one. He doesn’t need to run more than everyone else because he makes everyone else run for him. “What impresses me most is his football intelligence. His mind is always several seconds ahead of the defenders. By the time they realise what he has seen, the move is already finished. That isn’t something you can coach. It’s a gift. “People will talk about goals and assists, but Leo’s biggest quality has always been his ability to control matches. He decides the rhythm, he decides when to attack, when to slow the game down, and when to produce something extraordinary. Very few players in history have ever had that level of influence. “Now he has another World Cup final ahead of him against Spain. Finals are never easy, but if anyone can produce another magical moment on the biggest stage, it’s Lionel Messi. I’ve learned never to doubt him. “When people look back at this World Cup years from now, they should remember that at 39 years old, Messi wasn’t just participating—he was leading Argentina, inspiring a generation once again. For me, there has never been another player like him, and I don’t believe there ever will be.”

🚨Pep Guardiola was asked about Lionel Messi’s performances at the 2026 FIFA World Cup ahead of Argentina’s final against Spain. 🎙️ Reporter: “Pep, Lionel Messi has once again been one of the standout players of the tournament at 39 years old and now has Argentina one win away from another World Cup. What have you made of his performances?” 🗣️ Pep Guardiola: “People keep asking me how Messi is still doing this at 39. My answer is always the same because football has never seen anyone like him. Age defeats everyone, but somehow it refuses to defeat Lionel Messi. “This World Cup has been another reminder that greatness is not only about speed or physical power. It’s about understanding the game better than everyone else. Leo sees football before it happens. That is why he continues to dominate the biggest matches. “I’ve had the privilege of coaching him, so I know what he is capable of. But even now, he still surprises me. Every touch has a purpose, every pass creates danger, and every decision he makes is the right one. He doesn’t need to run more than everyone else because he makes everyone else run for him. “What impresses me most is his football intelligence. His mind is always several seconds ahead of the defenders. By the time they realise what he has seen, the move is already finished. That isn’t something you can coach. It’s a gift. “People will talk about goals and assists, but Leo’s biggest quality has always been his ability to control matches. He decides the rhythm, he decides when to attack, when to slow the game down, and when to produce something extraordinary. Very few players in history have ever had that level of influence. “Now he has another World Cup final ahead of him against Spain. Finals are never easy, but if anyone can produce another magical moment on the biggest stage, it’s Lionel Messi. I’ve learned never to doubt him. “When people look back at this World Cup years from now, they should remember that at 39 years old, Messi wasn’t just participating—he was leading Argentina, inspiring a generation once again. For me, there has never been another player like him, and I don’t believe there ever will be.”

SethOfficial

20,961 views • 2 months ago

“How can Kobe be Top 1-2 scorer all time he only has two scoring titles”. It’s because Kobe wasn’t the ball hog yall think he is and he sacrificed to WIN. Kobe’s scoring finishes each season between 2001 - 2013: 2001 #4 at 28.5PPG sharing W/Shaq 2002 #6 at 25.2 PPG sharing W/Shaq 2003 #2 at 30 PPG sharing W/Shaq 2004 #4 at 24 PPG sharing W/Shaq *Shaq leaves: 2005 #2 at 27.7 PPG 2006 #1 at 35.4 PPG 2007 #1 at 31.6 PPG 2008 #2 at 28.3 PPG AS SOON AS HE LEAVES SHAQ, 4 years in a row Kobe finishes Top 2. Kobe playing with Shaq held back averages and scoring titles because he had to sacrifice to feed Shaq and keep the big man’s ego up. 2009 #3 at 26.8 PPG 2010 #4 at 27.0 PPG 2011 #5 at 25.3 PPG 2012 #2 at 27.9 PPG (sat out last game/lost by .01) 2013 #3 at 27.3 PPG (34 Y.O. no signs of slowing) 2014 injury that all but ended his career Kobe finished #2 four times and Shared 4 of these seasons with Shaq. Kobe CLEARLY could have had more scoring titles but was focused on winning. He wanted teammates he could trust and share the ball with. Kobe wasn’t a stat stuffer like people think. If he was he would have kept “trash” teammates and won the scoring title every year. He had that 35PPG just to show you what he could do if he wanted. That 35 PPG hadn’t been done since Jordan pulled it off in 1988 and wasn’t done again until 2018 when Harden did it. No one else will probably do that for another 15-20 years. Few other reasons why KOBE IS A TOP 1-2 SCORER ALL TIME. All accolades accomplished in the hardest era of all time IMO: -Had 4-game in a row w/50+ PTS in 2007 recording: 65PTS, 50PTS, 60PTS, 50PTS -Had 9-game stretch of 40PTS in 2003 Had 6 60PT games (2nd all time behind Wilt) -Had 25 50PT games (3rd all time behind Wilt/Jordan) -Had 122 40PT games (3rd all time behind Wilt/Jordan) -Led the league in total points 4 times -Scored the most PTS in the 2000s with 21,605 PTS -Most PTS scored in a modern era: 81 PTS -4th in all time points with 33,643 -Most points for a shooting guard all time -Scored 60 PTS at 37 years old (record) Kobe was an elite scorer and was only stopped because of injury. And this is why all that “Kobe had only two scoring titles” means nothing in regards to how elite of a scorer he is. There is no one you can name besides MJ in the modern era that had the scoring peak, ability and stats that Kobe had when it comes to scoring. There’s no one that measures up. NO ONE. Don’t let the scoring titles fool you. Kobe was pretty much Micheal Jordan in a better era when it comes to scoring (MJ still the GOAT though).

“How can Kobe be Top 1-2 scorer all time he only has two scoring titles”. It’s because Kobe wasn’t the ball hog yall think he is and he sacrificed to WIN. Kobe’s scoring finishes each season between 2001 - 2013: 2001 #4 at 28.5PPG sharing W/Shaq 2002 #6 at 25.2 PPG sharing W/Shaq 2003 #2 at 30 PPG sharing W/Shaq 2004 #4 at 24 PPG sharing W/Shaq *Shaq leaves: 2005 #2 at 27.7 PPG 2006 #1 at 35.4 PPG 2007 #1 at 31.6 PPG 2008 #2 at 28.3 PPG AS SOON AS HE LEAVES SHAQ, 4 years in a row Kobe finishes Top 2. Kobe playing with Shaq held back averages and scoring titles because he had to sacrifice to feed Shaq and keep the big man’s ego up. 2009 #3 at 26.8 PPG 2010 #4 at 27.0 PPG 2011 #5 at 25.3 PPG 2012 #2 at 27.9 PPG (sat out last game/lost by .01) 2013 #3 at 27.3 PPG (34 Y.O. no signs of slowing) 2014 injury that all but ended his career Kobe finished #2 four times and Shared 4 of these seasons with Shaq. Kobe CLEARLY could have had more scoring titles but was focused on winning. He wanted teammates he could trust and share the ball with. Kobe wasn’t a stat stuffer like people think. If he was he would have kept “trash” teammates and won the scoring title every year. He had that 35PPG just to show you what he could do if he wanted. That 35 PPG hadn’t been done since Jordan pulled it off in 1988 and wasn’t done again until 2018 when Harden did it. No one else will probably do that for another 15-20 years. Few other reasons why KOBE IS A TOP 1-2 SCORER ALL TIME. All accolades accomplished in the hardest era of all time IMO: -Had 4-game in a row w/50+ PTS in 2007 recording: 65PTS, 50PTS, 60PTS, 50PTS -Had 9-game stretch of 40PTS in 2003 Had 6 60PT games (2nd all time behind Wilt) -Had 25 50PT games (3rd all time behind Wilt/Jordan) -Had 122 40PT games (3rd all time behind Wilt/Jordan) -Led the league in total points 4 times -Scored the most PTS in the 2000s with 21,605 PTS -Most PTS scored in a modern era: 81 PTS -4th in all time points with 33,643 -Most points for a shooting guard all time -Scored 60 PTS at 37 years old (record) Kobe was an elite scorer and was only stopped because of injury. And this is why all that “Kobe had only two scoring titles” means nothing in regards to how elite of a scorer he is. There is no one you can name besides MJ in the modern era that had the scoring peak, ability and stats that Kobe had when it comes to scoring. There’s no one that measures up. NO ONE. Don’t let the scoring titles fool you. Kobe was pretty much Micheal Jordan in a better era when it comes to scoring (MJ still the GOAT though).

THE KOBJECTIVE VIEW

121,590 views • 1 year ago

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

Stefan.

210,938 views • 17 days ago

In 1988, Jim Simons flew to Berkeley to beg a math professor to fix his hedge fund. The professor had never traded a stock. He had spent his career on coding theory and mathematical board games. He agreed to help on the condition he could leave when he wanted. He delivered 55 percent net in his full year running it. Then he handed the whole thing back and went home to teach undergraduates. His name was Elwyn Berlekamp. He is one of two people who ever ran what would become the most profitable trading operation in history. Simons was the other one. MIT math PhD, 1964. Berlekamp wrote foundational papers in coding theory that still run every CD, DVD, satellite link, and QR code on Earth. The Berlekamp-Massey algorithm, published 1968, is why every scratched CD you owned still played through to the end. He also co-wrote "Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays" with John Conway and Richard Guy. Four volumes. It became the foundational text of combinatorial game theory. Berlekamp thought about board games the way most mathematicians think about theorems. He proved endgame results in Go that professional masters had assumed were unprovable. His 1994 book "Mathematical Go" reduced the last moves of a Go game to a formula. Top-ranked professionals started studying it. Simons had a problem in the late 1980s. His trading partnership was falling apart. The fund was losing money. He flew west to see the game theorist. Berlekamp bought a controlling stake, cut what was not working, and rebuilt the trading logic from combinatorial game theory principles. The fund returned 55 percent net after fees in his full year running it. In December 1990, Berlekamp sold his stake back to Simons and walked out. He wanted to go back to Berkeley. In interviews he said the same thing many times, in different words: Berkeley was where he belonged. Simons kept building on the system Berlekamp rebuilt. It became the Medallion Fund. Over the next 30 years, Medallion compounded at roughly 66 percent gross per year. It is the most profitable trading strategy in the history of finance. Berlekamp took his cut in 1990 and never went back. He spent the rest of his life at UC Berkeley. He gave a lecture called "Mathematics and Go" that is on YouTube. He died in 2019, aged 78. The paradox is not that Berlekamp made a fortune. It is that he had the door to the biggest fortune in trading history held open for him and walked out. The math was fun. The billions were not.

In 1988, Jim Simons flew to Berkeley to beg a math professor to fix his hedge fund. The professor had never traded a stock. He had spent his career on coding theory and mathematical board games. He agreed to help on the condition he could leave when he wanted. He delivered 55 percent net in his full year running it. Then he handed the whole thing back and went home to teach undergraduates. His name was Elwyn Berlekamp. He is one of two people who ever ran what would become the most profitable trading operation in history. Simons was the other one. MIT math PhD, 1964. Berlekamp wrote foundational papers in coding theory that still run every CD, DVD, satellite link, and QR code on Earth. The Berlekamp-Massey algorithm, published 1968, is why every scratched CD you owned still played through to the end. He also co-wrote "Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays" with John Conway and Richard Guy. Four volumes. It became the foundational text of combinatorial game theory. Berlekamp thought about board games the way most mathematicians think about theorems. He proved endgame results in Go that professional masters had assumed were unprovable. His 1994 book "Mathematical Go" reduced the last moves of a Go game to a formula. Top-ranked professionals started studying it. Simons had a problem in the late 1980s. His trading partnership was falling apart. The fund was losing money. He flew west to see the game theorist. Berlekamp bought a controlling stake, cut what was not working, and rebuilt the trading logic from combinatorial game theory principles. The fund returned 55 percent net after fees in his full year running it. In December 1990, Berlekamp sold his stake back to Simons and walked out. He wanted to go back to Berkeley. In interviews he said the same thing many times, in different words: Berkeley was where he belonged. Simons kept building on the system Berlekamp rebuilt. It became the Medallion Fund. Over the next 30 years, Medallion compounded at roughly 66 percent gross per year. It is the most profitable trading strategy in the history of finance. Berlekamp took his cut in 1990 and never went back. He spent the rest of his life at UC Berkeley. He gave a lecture called "Mathematics and Go" that is on YouTube. He died in 2019, aged 78. The paradox is not that Berlekamp made a fortune. It is that he had the door to the biggest fortune in trading history held open for him and walked out. The math was fun. The billions were not.

Veles

72,810 views • 1 month ago

🚨 JUST IN: JD Vance was asked, "What have you learned from President Trump?" VANCE: "He has better instincts about human beings than ANYBODY I have EVER met." 💯 "The president is amazing at compartmentalizing things. When something is going on, there's always a crisis. The very best day in the West Wing, there's at least one crisis somewhere in the world that somebody's putting your desk." "The president has an incredible ability to sort of say - 'focus on that for 15 minutes, and then go and focus on something totally different for 15 minutes.'" "That's not naturally how I am. If something bad is going on, I tend to want to think about that thing and solve that problem before I go on to something else." "The president is incredible at that compartmentalization. I think that's one of the reasons why he can handle 10 different problems at once - is because he's able to troubleshoot and then move on to the next thing." I believe it!

🚨 JUST IN: JD Vance was asked, "What have you learned from President Trump?" VANCE: "He has better instincts about human beings than ANYBODY I have EVER met." 💯 "The president is amazing at compartmentalizing things. When something is going on, there's always a crisis. The very best day in the West Wing, there's at least one crisis somewhere in the world that somebody's putting your desk." "The president has an incredible ability to sort of say - 'focus on that for 15 minutes, and then go and focus on something totally different for 15 minutes.'" "That's not naturally how I am. If something bad is going on, I tend to want to think about that thing and solve that problem before I go on to something else." "The president is incredible at that compartmentalization. I think that's one of the reasons why he can handle 10 different problems at once - is because he's able to troubleshoot and then move on to the next thing." I believe it!

Eric Daugherty

743,668 views • 10 months ago

Forget about the “colored sorority” comment for a second & think about what he’s asking: Why hasn’t someone who’s been a presidential for 3 days done a 1-on-1 interview like her opponent (who hasn’t done hasn’t done one in 2 months)? Why would a presidential candidate want to address an organization that represents 350,000 of the most loyal voters who outperform every other demographic? If Harris missing Netanyahu’s speech is such a travesty, why didn’t he mention the fact that she will meet with him separately at the White House? You think he knows that MOST Republicans boycotted the last speech to Congress by a visiting head of state? Even though Brian Kilmeade has a history of white nationalism, right-wing extremism, Islamophobia and scientific racism, here’s why I would NEVER call Brian Kilmeade racist or accuse him of being biased: A lot of what we attribute to privilege or racism can more easily be explained by something much simpler. It’s likely that Brian doesn’t KNOW that calling someone “colored” can be considered a racial slur. Who would tell him? His white cohosts? Fox News’ 94% white, 1% Black audience? Most people know because of their life experience life experience? Well, he attended a high school that less was than 1% Black going to college play soccer in a 1% Black town. Then he was a UFC commentator and a sports talk show host. He has never worked in politics or covered it as a journalist. Now if you’re asking how a failed soccer player turned sports reporter got a job covering politics on the most watched political platform in America, the answer is: HOW THE FUCK WOUKD I KNOW? In any case, the fact that the host of one of cable news’ most-watched shows doesn’t know things is irrelevant. He doesn’t HAVE to know things. Not knowing things has not impacted his life in any way. If Brian Kilmeade was Black, Brian Kilmeade would DEFINITELY call Brian Kilmeade a diversity hire. He is living proof of one thing we all know: Being dumb is a white privilege

Forget about the “colored sorority” comment for a second & think about what he’s asking: Why hasn’t someone who’s been a presidential for 3 days done a 1-on-1 interview like her opponent (who hasn’t done hasn’t done one in 2 months)? Why would a presidential candidate want to address an organization that represents 350,000 of the most loyal voters who outperform every other demographic? If Harris missing Netanyahu’s speech is such a travesty, why didn’t he mention the fact that she will meet with him separately at the White House? You think he knows that MOST Republicans boycotted the last speech to Congress by a visiting head of state? Even though Brian Kilmeade has a history of white nationalism, right-wing extremism, Islamophobia and scientific racism, here’s why I would NEVER call Brian Kilmeade racist or accuse him of being biased: A lot of what we attribute to privilege or racism can more easily be explained by something much simpler. It’s likely that Brian doesn’t KNOW that calling someone “colored” can be considered a racial slur. Who would tell him? His white cohosts? Fox News’ 94% white, 1% Black audience? Most people know because of their life experience life experience? Well, he attended a high school that less was than 1% Black going to college play soccer in a 1% Black town. Then he was a UFC commentator and a sports talk show host. He has never worked in politics or covered it as a journalist. Now if you’re asking how a failed soccer player turned sports reporter got a job covering politics on the most watched political platform in America, the answer is: HOW THE FUCK WOUKD I KNOW? In any case, the fact that the host of one of cable news’ most-watched shows doesn’t know things is irrelevant. He doesn’t HAVE to know things. Not knowing things has not impacted his life in any way. If Brian Kilmeade was Black, Brian Kilmeade would DEFINITELY call Brian Kilmeade a diversity hire. He is living proof of one thing we all know: Being dumb is a white privilege

Michael Harriot

186,464 views • 2 years ago