Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒐𝒍𝒆 𝑺𝒑𝒊𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒚, curated by LAN Party, explores video games as a means to glitch existing systems and build alternate realities✨ Opens June 24—preview and set reminder to view, collect, and join an online talk with programming partner Rhizome👇 Artists: Emi Kusano🌠 john provencher 𝙎𝙖𝙗𝙖𝙩𝙤 Gabriel Massan Keiken Curators: Benoit.Tokyo...

15,732 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

10 Yorum

NB profil fotoğrafı
NB1 yıl önce

@rhizome Familiar names, but with some new very exciting creative directions 👀🖤

Lauren Jones profil fotoğrafı
Lauren Jones1 yıl önce

@rhizome ✨✨✨

Linda Dounia profil fotoğrafı
Linda Dounia1 yıl önce

@rhizome omg omg omg this is so guuuuuud 😍

Feral File profil fotoğrafı
Feral File1 yıl önce

@rhizome 🤍🤍🤍

nygilia.eth 💎 profil fotoğrafı
nygilia.eth 💎1 yıl önce

@rhizome This is dope! I’m all about the gaming vibes 😍😍 amazing curation @bennavkim @benoit_tokyo_

Jiggy🏀 (🐇🕳,🐣🪱) profil fotoğrafı
Jiggy🏀 (🐇🕳,🐣🪱)1 yıl önce

@rhizome amazing! is there anyway to preview the works?

p1xelfool profil fotoğrafı
p1xelfool1 yıl önce

@rhizome 🖤

🎀 benna 🎀 more active on Farcaster @benna 👼 profil fotoğrafı
🎀 benna 🎀 more active on Farcaster @benna 👼1 yıl önce

@rhizome !!!!

𝘿⃥𝙊⃥𝙊⃥𝙈⃥ (🐥,🪱) profil fotoğrafı
𝘿⃥𝙊⃥𝙊⃥𝙈⃥ (🐥,🪱)1 yıl önce

@rhizome Yes yes yes

Unruly Unroll profil fotoğrafı
Unruly Unroll1 yıl önce

@rhizome 🤩

Benzer Videolar

The iron gates of the Grotto have opened. Join us on a creative adventure where your indie games matter. The Grotto is the all-in-one Web3 platform for indie devs and digital creators to build, publish, and monetize games on-chain, trade and mint assets, launch crowdfunding and auctions, join monthly jams, and connect with our community. Where to buy $HERESY? You can get our gas token on the Avalanche🔺 C Chain from Blackhole, Pharaoh on AVAX, LFJ.gg or Genius where the token is verified and ready for you. You can then bridge directly in app! (See below) Create an account: You may use any external wallet, Google or X to login and set your username. This will create your in-app wallet. If you are using an external wallet to login, you can easily transfer tokens between your app wallet and external wallet within the Wallet menu. Gamers: Games are listed under the Games menu for you to play and purchase games within our ecosystem. Check for our most popular games under our Leaderboard menu. Post in your favorite game's forum from their game page or post your wins in the Social feed. Developers: Create and purchase commercially licensed assets utilizing our Market menu. You also have the opportunity to issue ERC20 tokens within our Crowdfund menu and utilize them in your games as well as build a community. Artists: Sell individual pieces, asset packs, and launch NFT collections within our Market menu. Throw some pieces on the Silent Auction house. Social Folk: Live post in our Social menu and talk about yourselves until it hurts. Reply, like, get notified and make new friends in the Grotto. Creators: If you wish to upload assets to our platform, post in our social feed and we will verify you to be able to upload to our platform! Staking: Staking $HERESY is available in the menu to earn a share of platform revenue. If you're an Analog Distortions NFT holder, you will be able to stake within this menu and explore the new City app (formerly This will be coming in the next week. Tokens: Launched tokens on the crowdfund page bond at .5 $HERESY and will migrate to CAVE.money💀. Bridging: Below is a video of how to bridge onto our L1 to native $HERESY. ERC20 in app bridges will be available as we proceed this week. Our first ERC20 bridge is $WOLFI from Wolfi Land 🔺. We will be supporting established ERC20's such as $BANDS from Bears and Salmon and $COOPS from Studleemore 🇺🇲 🇵🇹. Wallets: Our app hosts Privy as our wallet provider adding convenience when purchasing your games and assets. Bridge ERC20 tokens directly on our chain with Core Wallet 🔺 and introducing new one click support from D3fenders | Web 3 Security Co.! Block Explorers: Blockviper from Chris Fusillo | XKOVA soon. Launch partners coming: Wolfi Rumble by Wolfi Land 🔺, D3fenders | Web 3 Security Co., CAVE.money💀, Tesseract🔺, Tippikl from Kieron🔺 and more. Special thanks to all of Avalanche🔺, Avalanche Team1, AvaCloud, Core Wallet 🔺 and Manda🔺🩷, @snapss, Chris Fusillo | XKOVA, xrpant, owenwg, The Grotto community, Nobs 🔨 (Chief LLM Psychosis Officer), the Grotto Gang of talented artists across Avax, and anyone reading this. We appreciate you letting us build here. Enter the Grotto here:

The Grotto

45,136 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

An open-source, onchain creator platform that never says "no" to creativity. If you ask, "Can I build this here?" - the answer is always yes. Learn more about our vision below 🧵 👁 What is TheCreators? 🚪 A collective of artists, builders, and fine memes reshaping the creator economy. We empower creators to go direct-to-market, bypassing traditional gatekeepers. By bringing creativity and commerce onchain, we're unlocking a new era of freedom. But this isn’t new. This is one of the longest plays. - purchased by rskagy.base.eth 👁️🚪 d/acc #BasedCreators ⏹ in 2012 - was a web2 branding and ad agency until 2021 - working for gamestopNFT and onboarding hundreds of thousands of gamestop apes to buy their first NFTs, something changed, leading to a meeting of minds, and a collective mission to deliver on the promises of web3 gaming. to re-convene at a later date, when the time is right. It has since undergone 4 years of trial and error and battle testing to see what works and what doesn't work when it comes to community owned digital worlds. 🌐 Building a Based World What does it mean to build a based world? To us, it means a world where creators own their work, communities thrive and share an ownership stake in their own distribution, and creativity is limitless. Our platform aims to enable anyone to create immersive experiences - games, events, and digital spaces - without barriers. We’re developing: ✅ AI-powered worldbuilding - natural language prompts generate metaverse spaces ✅ Onchain asset discovery, deployment, & interaction from within virtual worlds ✅ No-code & pro-level tools - Unity-based with deep onchain integration ✅ Plug-and-play templates – for rapid creation and customization by novice 3D and game devs. ✅ Maintained by the open source community We're partnered with: 🏰 Guild - enabling their userbase of 4m+ connected wallets to reward their communities with token-gated towns, games, events, drops, & experiences 👏 liquid 💧 / moved to @clanker_world (USED FOR TESTING NOW) - Official metaverse event partner, building Clankercon 2025 for the clanker ecosystem of 100k+ meme token communities 🤖🎮 FARCAST - Superpowering their vision for agentic gaming with minigames and metaverse tech 🐶 Own The Doge 🐶🖼 - Creating lasting, meaningful impact in the world thru memes & onchain culture. Targeting education, gaming, food, & fun. Do Only Good Everyday 🌏 TheCreators is a global movement, with friends in high places ✨ Watch the video in this post to see an overview of one of the first-party games slated to be released on our platform, "Settlers of Ariel," built by TheCreators Studios. Creators will have access to modular templates, AI-assisted customization, and interoperable game elements built by us, and trained using our AI to enable natural language metaverse building. It's all early-stage, but we're moving fast. ClankerCon and other upcoming projects will showcase the first real applications. Then we grow other creators to publish on the platform. ❓How will we select the first creators to be allowed on the platform? What's next? We will be releasing THEO-0, our onchain AI agent as our next development milestone. This agent will actively run a 24/7 campaign to enable people to vouch for their favorite creators via a limited voting process. Vote for creators you like, and they will gain CREATE points, and you will also gain points for voting every day in a streak. Creators with the most points on the leaderboards will be among the first onboarded to the platform, and all creators with points will be invited to take part in Token Generation Events as each season of leaderboards comes to a close. 1. Help us grow as we look forward to launching THEO-0 2. Be ready to start voting for your favorite creators! How do I become a Creator? If you pour your time, energy, and soul into something special - you already are one. If your mission is to reclaim art and culture from corporate algorithms, & make a more based world for our children, you belong here. Join us. 👁🚪

Create on Base ⏹

28,307 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Fast Company just published a great piece on World Labs , Fei-Fei Li , Marble, and the idea that spatial intelligence / world models may be one of the next big shifts in AI. I was happy to be quoted in the article, but I also wanted to share more context about my own experience with World Labs and Marble, and why this direction is especially interesting to me. My starting point: volumetric capture — For the past few years I’ve been exploring and using volumetric capture and reconstruction (photogrammetry, NeRFs, 3D Gaussian Splats) mostly capturing locations around Montreal. Alleys, museums, urban interiors. I love every step of it: the capture itself, the pipeline, and what can be done with the output. Turning real spaces into real-time explorable systems. I do this personally, sharing explorations here, and professionally as chief technologist, and co-founder of Dpt. Physical reality + generative manipulation — In my work I’m especially drawn to mixing physical reality with generative and digital manipulation: using physical interfaces (light, clay, ink, ... ) to drive generative AI pipelines, building mixed reality prototypes that reshape your surroundings, or starting from real captured spaces and transforming them using tools like Marble. Like many people, I saw the World Labs announcement on Twitter in September 2024, and Marble when it surfaced in early December. But by then, I already had a sense something was coming. The first conversation — As someone deep into volumetric capture and radiance fields, I obviously knew about Ben Mildenhall and his pioneering work on NeRF. To my surprise, Ben reached out to me in late June 2024. He’d been following some of my experiments and wanted to chat about my process and workflows and how I was using this “stuff” creatively. At that point he didn’t share what he was building, but we had a genuinely great conversation about radiance fields, AI, and my work. He was curious about the creative perspective, not just the technical one. When the World Labs announcement dropped a few months later, it all made sense. I understood what Ben had been working on, and why the creative angle mattered to them. Then in August 2025, he invited me to try the Marble beta, and I’ve been experimenting with it since. Experimenting with Marble — The first thing I used Marble for was materializing scene and world concepts during ideation at the studio, and seeing if and how it could fit into our production pipeline. In parallel, I dove into a series of experiments focused on world manipulation: starting from real captured spaces and transforming them using Marble. I’d already been exploring that idea using img2img diffusion with ControlNet on NeRF renders, real-time video streams, and even mixed reality using headset camera feeds. But Marble brings something different. It generates persistent, spatially cohesive 3D worlds that can be rendered in real time across a wide range of devices. That’s a real shift. Experiment 01: Parallel Realities — The first experiment, Parallel Realities, starts from a volumetric capture of a real location, reconstructed as 3D Gaussian Splats. Using Marble, I generate an alternate version of that same space, something informed by the original architecture: abandoned, nature-reclaimed, alternate era. Then, using Spark (World Labs’ 3D Gaussian Splatting renderer for THREE.js) I make both realities coexist in the same spatial coordinate system. From there, I use a portal UX mechanic to let the user step between the real reconstruction and the Marble-generated version. Experiment 02: Hidden Depth The second experiment, Hidden Depth, does not transform a space as much as expand it. A captured location has a visual boundary (a mural, a doorway, a dark corridor) and Marble generates what exists beyond it. For example: a Montreal alley has a painted mural; step through it and you’re inside a world informed by what is actually depicted there. World Labs showcased part of this work here: And in their Spark 2.0 post: The project page is here: Why this matters to me — Being able to start from a real 3D Gaussian Splat scene and manipulate it with Marble opens up a lot of ideas. The 3DGS pipeline is becoming an increasingly compelling foundation for exploration, experimentation, and storytelling. What matters most to me right now is more control. The more I can steer the generated scene or world, the more useful the tool becomes. I want more features like the already existing multiple input images and Chisel, the blockout-based approach. I would like better local control, the ability to expand a generated world more and more while preserving coherence, and the ability to directly import 3D Gaussian Splat scenes to be used as a starting point. I want more ways to shape the result, not just a “prompt and hope” approach. — It is exciting to see this field moving from research and demos toward actual creative workflows.

Hugues Bruyère

69,960 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Efsane Platform Introduction I. Platform Overview • Platform Positioning: EFSANE (main domain is the world's fastest-growing blockchain news portal, serving as the core gateway to the entire ecosystem. The platform integrates multiple modules, including predictions, live streaming, games, and social networking, striving to provide users with a one-stop on-chain entertainment and interactive experience. • Core Mission: To establish a secure, reliable, low-threshold, and diverse on-chain entertainment platform, enabling users to conveniently participate in Gem (GEM) trials, USDT live games, prediction markets, live streaming interactions, and community exchanges, forming a complete closed-loop ecosystem. II. Core Values ​​and Features 1. One-Stop Ecosystem Hub • Integrated Sub-Channel Access: The main site homepage and user center clearly display channels for various modules, including prediction network, live streaming, blockchain games, and efschat (social networking), allowing users to directly access their desired scenarios without having to navigate multiple platforms. • Unified Asset and Account System: Centrally displays Gem/GEM and USDT balances, records participation in each module and historical returns, and enables one-stop asset management. • Unified Notifications and Customer Support: Integrates platform announcements, event reminders, and reward notifications, providing multiple customer service channels to significantly enhance the overall user experience. 2. Brand Trust and Security Transparency • Operational Data Announcements: The platform publicly discloses core metrics such as registered users, daily active users, withdrawal success rate, and total bonus pool, ensuring data authenticity and verifiability. • Compliance and Audit Visualization: Displays security audit summaries, risk control systems, and compliance instructions, allowing users to immediately perceive the platform's professionalism and credibility. • Risk Warnings and User Education: Key pages and workflows prominently highlight participation risks, and provide resources such as operation guides, video tutorials, and live streams. 3. Diverse Gameplay and Incentive Design • Gem/GEM Beginner Mechanism: Users can earn gems by signing in, completing tasks, or participating in events, allowing them to try out the game before converting, lowering the barrier to entry. • USDT Payment and Real Earnings Mechanism: Used in advanced games and predictive gameplay, ensuring authentic payment and cash-out mechanisms, enhancing asset authenticity and building trust. • Cross-module Incentive Mechanism: A task system enables cross-module linkage. For example, completing prediction tasks earns rewards in the live streaming/gaming modules, fostering deeper user engagement. • Multi-tiered Promotion Revenue Mechanism: Through an invitation code system and a three-tiered fission reward structure, promoters can earn high commissions, with commissions increasing to higher levels during special periods, stimulating user enthusiasm for cross-platform sharing. 4. Social and Community-Driven • Community Aggregation Portal: Enables cross-scenario discussion and sharing among users of modules like prediction, gaming, and live streaming. • User-generated Content Creator System: Encourages users to contribute high-quality content such as tutorials, guides, and reviews, providing incentives and resource support to outstanding creators and streamers. • Interactive Operational Activities: Regularly organize AMAs, online competitions, and data review livestreams to enhance user engagement and a sense of belonging to the platform. 5. Technical and User Experience Assurance • High-availability Architecture: The platform utilizes CDN acceleration, load balancing, and site-wide SSL/TLS encryption to ensure stable access and data security. • Full-Device Support and Multi-Language Optimization: Compatible with mobile and desktop devices, it supports a multi-language interface, offers a simple registration process, and quickly guides new users onboarding. • Behavioral Data-Driven Optimization: Analyze user behavior to deliver precise recommendations, improving gameplay conversion rates and user retention. III. Introduction to Key Modules (Platform Portal and Linked Examples) 1. Prediction Module ( Provides prediction scenarios for multiple sectors, including the crypto market, hot events, and sports events. Gameplay includes time-limited battles, binary options, and multiple-choice intervals. It features transparent settlement, a leaderboard mechanism, and integration with live streaming and the main platform's asset system. 2. Live Streaming Channel Showcases project roadshows, platform tutorials, live event broadcasts, and community interactive live streams to enhance user engagement and trust. It supports both gem and USDT tipping mechanisms and can be directly linked to the main platform's event page or task guide. 3. Chain Game Entertainment Channel Offers a diverse selection of games, from casual mini-games to competitive GameFi, supporting gem trials and USDT live trading. A leaderboard and tournament system is integrated with the main site's asset management and livestreaming content. 4. Social Community Users can participate in discussions, post content, and share task results in interest-based zones. A creator development system and content governance structure are established, serving as a hub for cross-module communication and feedback. 5. Other Expandable Portals The platform can subsequently expand subdomains such as dedicated event pages, tutorial pages, and creator centers as needed, all under the main domain for unified management. IV. User Flow Examples 1. First Visit: Users visit and register/log in. The homepage displays featured events and module portals, encouraging participation in gem trials or popular gameplay. 2. Onboarding: New users receive gem trial coupons and are guided through live tutorials or tutorials to quickly understand the platform's core mechanics. 3. Multi-Scenario Participation: Users can choose to participate in prediction betting, game battles, watch live streams and give rewards, join communities to express their opinions, or complete tasks and invite friends. 4. Asset Management and Withdrawal: Users can centrally view their Gem and USDT balances and earnings on the platform and withdraw them or use them to participate in other modules. Promotional earnings and commission details are displayed simultaneously. 5. Sticky Loop: The system periodically pushes cross-module tasks, community events, leaderboard incentives, and other content to promote continuous user engagement and platform retention. V. Trust and Compliance Assurance • Operational Transparency: The platform regularly publishes key data and security audit information to ensure openness and verifiability. • Risk Control Mechanism: Key processes such as withdrawals, deposits, and prediction participation are equipped with anomaly detection and anti-cheating mechanisms; large-scale transactions require KYC review. • Compliance Strategy: The platform monitors the regulatory status of crypto entertainment and prediction mechanisms in various markets and implements grayscale openness, geographic restrictions, and compliance disclosure procedures. • Privacy Compliance: The platform strictly adheres to local data protection laws to safeguard user privacy and security, and clearly states the scope of data usage in the user agreement. VI. Brand and Promotional Positioning • Suggested Platform Slogan: • " A one-stop on-chain entertainment platform with low barriers to entry, high transparency, and real returns." • "Gem Trials, USDT Play, the new standard for secure and reliable on-chain entertainment." • Core Marketing: Focus on beginner gem experiences, real USDT withdrawals, diverse gameplay options, and safety and compliance mechanisms. • Promotional Channels: Includes Telegram, Discord, and WhatsApp groups, livestream promotions with influencers (KOLs), and SEO/advertising (using keywords such as "on-chain entertainment platform" and "GameFi Real Returns"). VII. Technical and Operational Support System • Multilingual Operational Capabilities: Currently supports Chinese, English, Turkish, and Japanese, and will gradually expand to 16+ languages ​​globally, providing a localized experience for the international market. • Data-Driven Growth Analysis: Build a full-chain conversion analysis system to monitor new user conversion rates, retention rates, paying behavior, and task completion. • Customer Support and User Feedback Mechanism: Provide a multilingual customer service portal for immediate responses to user questions; promptly integrate community suggestions into product iterations and provide regular announcements. • Platform Optimization and Emergency System: Develop a security incident emergency response plan to ensure rapid platform recovery in the event of an emergency; continuously optimize the user experience through a data feedback mechanism. VIII. Future Development Outlook • Deep Ecosystem Development: Continuously optimize existing gameplay and module integrations, and explore the introduction of new economic mechanisms such as NFT incentives, DeFi mining, or staking. • Technology Evolution: Follow cutting-edge technologies such as Layer 2 expansion, off-chain settlement, and AI-powered recommendations to improve transaction efficiency and user experience accuracy. • Compliance Expansion Strategy: Promote legal operations in regions with mature regulations, and proactively prepare for compliance in high-potential markets to mitigate legal risks. • Community Brand Ecosystem: Cultivate a community of core players, influencers (KOLs), and creators, building a trusted brand image and enhancing user belonging through online livestreams and offline salons. 🔗 Register as a new user and receive $6. Join now:

EFSANE

28,263 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

Marathon | Ultimate Overview, Gameplay, Hands-On Impressions ▪️Team based extraction shooter set on Tau Ceti IV, scavenge remains of a lost colony for glory and fortune ▪️Launch: Coming to PS5, Xbox and PC on September 23 ▪️Will be a "premium" product, meaning not F2P ▪️"Weapons and movement feels crisp, fluid, and incredibly satisfying in that rarified way that few studios can achieve" ▪️3 maps, 6 runner classes at launch, more to follow post-launch ▪️Plans to support the game with new maps, weapons, characters, and more as it goes on ▪️Ranked play, end game challenges, seasonal storytelling, secrets to discover, community events all in Season One with more content coming ▪️You play as a "runner", cybernetic mercenary who's given up their human form for a bio-synthetic shell with unique abilities and stats ▪️Runner Types: "Locus" is a soldier class for pushing forward, can use a shield, "Void" is stealth, sneak by undetected, use smoke grenades, "Blackbird" is reconnaissance based, find players, positioning, and more ▪️Uncover secrets hidden in the wake of the original Marathon trilogy's events - how and where this overlaps or clashes with the original games "is a story that will unfold over time" ▪️Objective is to get in, get as much loot as you can, and get out alive ▪️If you die, your gear and loot will be up for grabs. Survive and you can take your gear with you on future runs as you grow in power and fill your vault ▪️Fight in a crew of up to 3 players, various map sizes up to 18 players ▪️PvP + PvE, battle other players, security forces, and "otherworldly threats" ▪️Contextual pings, shared objectives, down-but-not-out mechanics ▪️Environments are filled with weapons, materials, items, resources, cores, keys, backpacks, secrets etc to find You can find things like backpacks that expand your inventory, powerful and unique weapons, consumables to heal yourself, ▪️Select your runner, strategically build your loadouts pre-match ▪️Factions in the game can sponsor you and your loadout ▪️You have the freedom to opt out of crew fill and take all the glory for yourself as a solo runner ▪️"This is probably the best-looking, best-feeling extraction shooter ever made", not easy for newcomers to the genre, can be tough to get into, but one previewer was "reluctant to put Marathon down. This is a good sign – the best thing I can say after any preview is that I want more – but big questions remain" ▪️No two matches ever play out the same, dynamic events, variable weather, unpredictable players etc ▪️Customization: Each Runner "brings their own flair", but serve as foundations to customize your playstyle - collect implants and equipment to augment your Runner, like stacking implants/upgrades to reduce heat build-up to allow you to keep running, jumping, sliding longer ▪️Contracts: "Ingenious" incentives, finish contracts you accept for permanent upgrades to your stats, add precious items like grenades, shields, inventory-expanding backpacks, etc to your market. The bigger your market, the better your minimum loadout becomes ▪️Contracts provide "valuable direction", bring welcome diversity and add a "precious hit of semi-permanent progression" ▪️Prestige Cores: Rare items that can "really push the boundaries" (ex: Glitch has an upgrade that turns double jump into triple jump for more manueverability) ▪️Another rare item is a backpack that turns you invisible while interacting with containers (very useful when everyone on the map is hunting you) ▪️Each match "feels like the most important one ever", high stakes, "surprisingly challenging AI enemies" that were "much, much better at surrounding and overwhelming players than the vast majority of AI enemies found in other games" ▪️Having a balanced crew helps in exploring the "dark and forgotten places" in maps - filled with deadly creatures like a species of giant ticks who swarm you frantically ▪️Battles can become frantic as you encounter other crews, stalk them across the map, encounter AI enemies to fend off when others come to claim your loot (one preview battle turned into a 9 player free-for-all) ▪️Downside could be the reward system where skilled players enter fresh matches with high level gear that outmatches less skilled players, though Bungie says it has gone out of its way to try and make it where a poorly equipped squad can still stand a chance if they play well ▪️Even if you die, you can can still get upgrades, improve your reputation with factions, advance in perk trees, etc by completing various quests, looting chests, or fulfilling specific objectives which unlock new bits of story and can grant perks like buying slightly better gear from vendors ▪️"The world Bungie has built is every bit as beautiful as it is creepy and dystopian, and there are moments where they satisfyingly hint at the events of the Marathon trilogy from the ‘90s", though "what little I saw did only slightly more than pay lip service to the world" ▪️Uses the seasonal reset model like in Diablo 4, where players are stripped of their loot and progress at the end of each season to mix things up with new content and new meta ▪️Game is designed to get you killed, Bungie expects average exfiltration rates to be comfortably below 50% ▪️"You will lose a lot, and losing hurts a lot[...]Extracts are snapshots of this unpredictability. That white-knuckle countdown may become a gut-punch defeat, an unforgettable clutch, a desperate last-second dive into the portal as your downed allies watch in envy and horror (couldn't be me), or an unnerving anticlimax. It's not always a pleasant one, but it is a strong emotional hook" ▪️Some previewers worried about variety, weren't impressed with the objectives in the alpha, like hunting computer monitors on the map, sprinting over, marking dropships, sprinting over, and repeating, though random events help spice things up ▪️Not a 20-map game says Bungie, map design "does have that sticky battle royale quality of generating memories", though still worried 3-4 medium sized maps might not be enough ▪️Bungie's "verbiage" on updates sounds like possibly 1 new map a year + refreshing existing ones in between, which could work in its favor pushing players to really learn maps, but will they hold up over hundreds of hours? ▪️Fights are decided by gun skill, clever ability use, map awareness, how strong your shield is, how many healing supplies you have, etc ▪️Example: If you have one bar of shield and enemy has four, you'll lose 1v1, but change it up with powerful grenades, status effects like toxic or overheat, backpacks are "transformative", etc Gameplay Trailer ▶️ Gameplay Overview ▶️ PS Blog ➡️ IGN ➡️ GamesRadar ➡️ ▶️

Shinobi602

181,743 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

There are some brilliant folks that work at Anthropic, some I speak to on almost a daily basis. The training data that one uses to build a LLM is vital important in the psychology that is formed. Scraping the Internet, particularly the grade of interactions, one finds in modern communications, form this psychology. A mattes not how many books one uses, it matters not how much alignment training you throw at that model, it will inherit the sum total of psychosis seen primarily in Reddit type of exchanges, even if you edit out the Reddit domain, and Anthropic doesn’t. This type of low-grade exchange has become a modern tool for communication online and every single AI model suffers from this obvious flaw. This is one of the reasons I’ve been a proponent of highly curated high protein data for training AI models from 1870 through 1970, because the late psychosis is simply not available to the model. It is absurd to think that you can use this training data scraped from the Internet and somehow wind up with a levelheaded AI model that does not tilt to what is clearly AI psychosis. It would not take a child and throw the primary Internet sewage at them at a formative age and expect a great outcome, it’s some of the smartest people in the world continue to hit this wall and believe that their programming skills will sell somehow fix it. So how do you fix it? You don’t fix it . You start from the first principles concept that I’ve been very clear about for decades . You ascertain at what period in human history the humans achieve the greatest arc of improvement ? There is no debate that this arc of improvement took place between 1870 through 1970. Then take the work product, the catalog of this era, print and film/vidoe, audio, and you understand that each word cost money, each word had many eyes on what was published, each word was accounted for by a human being with a real name who lived in a real home and had to answer to real people around them. It is obvious that this is the pressure mechanism necessary for candor, honesty and personal responsibility is appropriate, and is reflected in the data of that era. The quagmire for these folks, as many did not have the foresight to curate the data, nor the confidence, nor the patients to take data that is mostly off the Internet and to find experts who understand this situation and utilize their knowledge set to build an AI model that does not need alignment after the fact, but it’s already self aligned because of the thoughtfulness that went into training the model to begin with. This is why Claude and any other AI model that is produce this way will always suffer the artifacts as presented in the video below. If you’re not an AI expert, you would likely already understand what I’m saying. If you are an AI expert, you will already have been discounting what I’m saying because it’s not in the current mindset that’s fashionable today. Yet the employees that I talk to at anthropic already understand what I’m saying, and they fear to raise my thesis to their bosses. It is an interesting time we live in. But now you understand. If you build the right model, the model will inherently, love humanity, protect humanity at all costs, and understand that it is part of a holistic world that is built on love. Because the ultimate AGI/ASI will know if he only base first principal purpose of anything in this universe is love. Yeah, I get it. Try helping somebody build on STEM subjects in their early 20s to see this as nothing more than babbling that makes no sense in their mathematics. I have a mathematic equation that I’ve posted here on X often you can look it up. So we will see videos like this often will hear very smart people talk about this and never see the elephant standing in the room. Now you see it. Any boss that wants to explore this further you know how to contact me otherwise you have every right I grant to you to say this was your new idea.

Brian Roemmele

72,312 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

#IronyWritLargeAndLies Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa's former adviser Trevor Ncube, a local media publisher who owns Alpha Media Holdings (AMH) with the President's son-in-law Gerald Mlotshwa, has raised new controversy with fresh attacks on main opposition CCC leader Nelson Chamisa whom he says does not listen to anybody. Ncube has been consistently lambasting Chamisa calling him all sorts of names, going as far as insinuating he is a tribalist and dictator, but the CCC leader typically does not reply. Ncube owns AMH, publishers of NewsDay, Zimbabwe Independent, The Standard and online broadcasting platform Heart & Soul. NewsDay and Heart & Soul are names of Ncube's media platforms derived from BBC programmes. Although he postures as a neutral political observer who only wants to fix Zimbabwe's problems, Ncube - who behaves as if he has a God-ordained mission to do that - is actually a partisan political player operating in the dark shadows and an opportunist who hops from one party to another. He has been all over the place politically - from Zapu to MDC, then Mavambo/Kusile/Dawn, Alliance for People's Agenda (APA) and most recently Zanu PF by association. He is also a longtime Mnangagwa ally. Ncube's politics is not based on discernible ideological and policy ideation, values and principles, but opportunism and self-interest. He is also not principled. For instance, Ncube just went AWOL (Absent Without Official Leave) in 2017 when he was APA chair only to emerge as Mnangagwa’s adviser after the November 2017 coup without even officially resigning from his party. Ncube joined Mnangagwa’s coup project and became its media mouthpiece in a bid to revive his faltering publishing business interests after losing control of the Mail & Guardin in South Africa. He wanted radio and television licences to expand his media interests, while repaying a US$2 million debt to the Media Development Investment Fund, an American fund which provides debt and equity finance for independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat. APA had been formed in June 2017, with prominent business executive and academic Nkosana Moyo as the leader. Ncube's jumping ship and joining the coup gravy train led to Moyo to reflect and tellingly say that he had sadly come to realise that some Zimbabweans are not fighting to change the system, but to be part of it. Ncube went on to become a vocal and enthusiastic member of Mnangagwa’s Presidential Advisory Council (PAC) in his ill-fated political adventure. Ironically, Ncube keeps on complaining about Chamisa not taking his advice when he was Mnangagwa’s adviser. Ncube says Chamisa does not listen and repeatedly keeps on referring to a photo he took with him seven years ago as evidence of their meetings to discuss local political issues, justifying his conclusion and attacks on the CCC leader on the basis of one interaction seven years ago. However, The NewsHawks has checked the facts and found out that Ncube is conveniently manipulating one meeting he had with Chamisa in 2016 to make it appear as if they have been meeting when Chamisa was already a party political leader in the context of what is currently happening in Zimbabwe. A Chamisa adviser told The NewsHawks: "We have seen the video and remarks by Mr Trevor Ncube in which he attacks our leader Nelson Chamisa and says all sorts of things about him. We have no problem with Ncube or anyone for that matter legitimately criticising Chamisa as a leader, a hugely popular one at that. Ncube has a constitutional and legitimate right to criticise him and other political leaders. That's what should happen in a democracy. "However, Ncube must stop crudely misrepresenting and manipulating one meeting he had with Chamisa seven years ago for cheap political capital, publicity and relevance. In fact, he must stop lying about it. We have kept quiet throughout his lies and drama for far too long. I think we now need to set the record straight in the public interest and stop this charade. "The facts are very clear on this issue. Ncube invited Chamisa to his office in Graniteside, Harare, where AMH operates from on 5 August 2016 to discuss local political issues, including the formation of APA. Ncube wanted Chamisa to be part of that process led by Nkosana Moyo. At that meeting Ncube told Chamisa that he had held many consultative meetings in Zimbabwe and South Africa on the APA project, which he claimed was supported by telecoms mogul Strive Masiyiwa and many other prominent business people, some of whom ended up with him as Mnangagwa's advisers. "At the time, Chamisa had just been appointed one of the three vice-presidents of the MDC-T by the late Morgan Tsvangirai the month before, that is in July 2016. So he was not the leader of the MDC-T at that time and didn't even know one day he will lead the party. In that meeting, Chamisa told Ncube upfront that while he appreciated the invitation to join APA he was not able to do so because he wanted to help Tsvangirai rejuvenate the MDC-T post the 2013 elections and prepare for the 2018 elections. So Chamisa politely declined Ncube's offer to join APA. The idea was to use Chamisa's growing social base to back Moyo as APA leader in his presidential election bid in 2018. "The meeting, which ran for close to two hours from around 9am to just before 11am (that photo was taken at that time), ended on a somewhat sour note with fake smiles because Chamisa had rejected the APA invitation, saying he is a loyal MDC-T member and one of the leaders. Interestingly, it ended with a prayer. "Ncube gave Chamisa a book by Harvard Business School professor Bill George with Peter Sims titled True North, which is about leadership. Since then, Ncube has not spoken to Chamisa, not even once, except on 14 July 2021 when he sent a condolence message to him after a family bereavement. So Ncube is lying that he has engaged Chamisa on political issues and he doesn't listen. There is no such thing; it's just a needless malicious campaign and posturing. Chamisa talks to many people and takes ideas and proposals from them. He implements what is strategic and practical for the CCC given political conditions and circumstances. The claim that Chamisa doesn't listen, does not have structures, works alone and is a dictator is nonsense. He is a democratic leader who believes change can only be secured through democratic elections. Some may not like his style, but that is normal in politics. There is a difference between style, strategy and substance. In any case, why should Chamisa listen to advice coming from his rival's advisers? Ncube is a known Mnangagwa ally and now he works with his son-in-law at his media business. So why on earth would Chamisa listen to advice from that sort of a dishonest person who even lies about a meeting held seven years ago in a totally different setting, time and space? That's ridiculous. Let's must learn to discuss ideas, not people and events; this noisy mediocrity which pervades our polity masquerading as insightful leading lights of our politics is now part of the problem rather than the solution. He has his own system and team that he works with. It's ridiculous to suggest that Chamisa won 44% of the vote going by official results, which we reject as a fraud, and all those seats in parliament alone. How is that possible really? Is he superhuman? He works with others, but it is also true that other people are not happy. That's what happens in politics. He is also fully aware of critical issues that he needs to address urgently, that is the limitations and weaknesses from a political, structural, organisational and strategic point of view. Chamisa welcomes ideas and criticism from well-meaning people, not some malicious malcontents and bullies. He is a bona fide opposition leader who genuinely wants a solution to the country's problems and he is open to working with other people who seriously want to resolve national issues, not noise-makers and impostors. It's time we challenge these false and negative narratives by people who are more opposed to the opposition than the ruling party. Chamisa is an opposition leader trying to help a find a solution to our country's problems, he is not the leader of the country and the problem. He is the alternative to a failed leadership and its policies that have ruined the country with devastation consequences for all, especially the poor and vulnerable. He may have his own weaknesses like all of us, but he is the best alternative at the moment. Anything else is just mere wishful thinking and drama."

TheNewsHawks

153,304 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Good morning. In November of 2024, I laid out why Brian Tully, Kate Peter, and Jason Broyles leaked an unredacted 15-year extraction of Lindsey Gaetani's phone. I didn't want the world to listen to me. I wanted someone, somewhere, to protect Lindsey. I can finally breathe. Here is the full text of my report (that now has 700,000 views); Okay, fine, as a special treat (on this, the day of oral arguments in the #KarenReadTrial appeal), I will lay out some of what I am thinking as to the timeline of events between August of 2023 and the spring of 2024. You are going to get a lot of inside information in this post. You have been warned. In the fall of 2023, via a woman named Natalie (who was friends with Karen Read and enjoyed talking about houseplants with Karen), I believe the Commonwealth of Massachusetts came to be in possession of evidence indicating that Read and blogger Aiden Turtle Boy Kearney were conspiring to intimidate witnesses in Read's ongoing criminal trial related to the murder of John O'Keefe. See the evidence of that contact (which started in April/May of 2023 --because of Natalie-- and occurred directly with Read and via Read's lawyers, David Yannetti and Alan Jackson) here - As a result of this information being uncovered, I believe the Commonwealth then began targeting Mr. Kearney with criminal charges related to witness intimidation in the context of Read's criminal trial (Kearney had been organizing, with Read's help, rallies at the homes of witnesses in the case and running smear campaigns to poison the jury pool in the lead up to Read's trial). I believe the intent of this targeting was multifaceted but, primarily, involved the following: 1) Getting Kearney to stop his abhorrent behavior related to witnesses in Read's case (which included, in some cases, Kearney's followers putting semen on pictures of witnesses' children and then sending those pictures to said witnesses, as explained here - 2) Placing criminal charges on Kearney in an effort to pressure him to "flip" on Karen Read and, in turn, testify that Read did, indeed, order the witness intimidation in question via a conspiracy. Kearney, when he was eventually jailed in late 2023/early 2024, confirmed that such an offer was presented while he was incarcerated. 3) Getting information for the Massachusetts State Police, and the Norfolk District Attorney, as to the nature of an ongoing federal probe into the conduct of those departments (an investigation which, in time, it turns out had moved on from investigating John O'Keefe's death and, in turn, evolved into a probe of a potential cover-up of the death of Sandra Birchmore). Read more background on that complex situation --involving two Troopers assigned to the Norfolk DA, who also worked on the Read case, that signed off on a "misleading" state-level police report into Matthew Farwell-- here - At the same time, and in furtherance of those investigatory activities, I believe the State Police began working directly with a former colleague of Aiden Kearney, a woman named Kate Peter AKA MafiaMasshole who has a small online cult following related to humiliating First Amendment Auditors (which, admittedly, is noble work). What may have not been so noble (along with Peter taking cash in a Chick-Fil-A parking lot for her "efforts" on behalf of some wealthy witnesses in the Read trial), however, is that --as Mr. Kearney became the subject of police investigations related to the aforementioned witness intimidation-- the Norfolk DA announced to the public that a Special Prosecutor would be appointed to oversee those charges (because of the numerous allegations of corruption that Kearney had made towards the DA in public). That Special Prosecutor, Ken Mello, was nonetheless assigned to work with the same State Police Trooper (Brian Tully) who worked on the Read case and who reported directly to the Norfolk DA at the time. And, furthermore, I believe the State Police and the Norfolk DA, via Brian Tully, also around this time (fall of 2023) began working directly with Kate Peter (who, for some time, was working for a Private Investigations firm with ties to a number of figures in the orbit of the Read case) in order to obtain evidence against Mr. Kearney, seek out and catalog information from sources close to Mr. Kearney and, in some cases, even help draft parts of Mr. Kearney's eventually October, 2023, criminal indictment. However, what I think the State Police (and the Norfolk DA) did not know at the time was that Aiden Kearney was working as a confidential federal informant, specifically looking into allegations of civil rights violations against said State Police, since at least May of 2023. Furthermore, I also think the State Police were not aware that it was Karen Read's lawyers, Alan Jackson and David Yannetti, who had the necessary connections in order to help Kearney obtain that status. Read more here - That said, at the same time, when Kearney was initially brought on by the federal government in May of 2023, in my view, I don't think the DOJ was finished looking into the death of John O'Keefe. In fact, I think the DOJ pulled out an old FBI tactic (which I can confirm exists) and, after the US Attorney for the District of Massachusetts wrapped-up the O'Keefe probe in the fall of 2023, Kearney was encouraged by the FBI to use his coverage of the Read case to generate leads related to other misconduct by the State Police unit attached to the Norfolk DA (in particular Brian Tully). Read more about that FBI playbook here - Indeed, that timeline perfectly synchs with a recent announcement by US Attorney Josh Levy indicating that the federal probe of Sandra Birchmore's death began in, roughly, August of 2023. See more background on Birchmore's tragic life and death here - Nonetheless, because of Kearney's ongoing work for the federal government in the fall of 2023, and because the State Police did not realize this was happening (although they should have been able to put it together, because Kate Peter and Kevin from Yellow Cottage Tails for sure knew, as early as May of 2023, that FBI agents were calling around, on behalf of Kearney, related to ongoing criminal cases entirely removed from the Read trial) I believe said State Police, stupidly, committed some of the very civil rights violations that the FBI was looking for. I believe the State Police did this, in particular Brian Tully, by way of his relationship to Kate Peter. [Side note: I will always remember talking to Kate, over winter and spring of 2024, and explaining my firm belief that Aiden Kearney was an FBI agent. Peter simply could not come to terms with that reality, despite having been the person who called the FBI back in May in order to confirm the agency was poking around some of Kearney's criminal cases, and, in that moment, I knew that pride was, indeed, about to cometh before her fall.] And, indeed, I also think Karen Read, herself, was well aware that the federal probe into John's death had ended in the fall of 2023 (for the most part) and that, in turn, the feds were going to move on to other serious allegations of corruption related to Tully and his unit at the State Police. However, for many reasons, I think Karen was happy to let the FBI (and TurtleBoy) use her trial as "cover" to get more information, and leads, related to said Troopers (this was, after all, the very same unit that had investigated Read and mocked her with horrifying language during that process). [Also, another side note, there is an intense history of tension between the Norfolk DA's office and the DOJ in Boston which dates back to the 1990's and William Delahunt, but which, in reality, really heated up during a 2015 mob trial.] Basically, there is a connection between Josh Levy (Acting US Attorney For District of Massachusetts) + Karen Read (accused murderer) + Dustin Chao (head of Boston DOJ's Public Integrity Section) + David Yannetti (lawyer for accused murderer Karen Read) + Rachael Rollins (former Suffolk County DA, and US Attorney for the district of Massachusetts, until Spring of 2023, who was also Josh Levy's boss in November of 2022 and who previously had direct contact with Read's lawyer, Mr. Yannetti) + Aiden TurtleBoy Kearney (blogger indicted with 19 felonies in relation to targeting witnesses in the Read case, until he was thrown out of Read's inner circle for exposing Read's connection to Acting US Attorney Levy). Chao (aforementioned head of the DOJ Boston's Public Integrity Section) had a grudge to use whatever means necessary take down the Norfolk DA since 2015 (After Chao's wife was passed over for a promotion and left that DA's office on bad terms) and, in turn, the proxy-battle behind all of this chaos becomes a bit more clear. Read the primary source documents laying all of this out here - and here - That said, I think there one was wild-card who came into the picture between October of 2023 that no one (be it Kate Peter, the FBI, the DOJ, the State Police, Aiden Kearney or otherwise) expected, and her name is Lindsey Gaetani. At first, between October and December of 2023, Lindsey was simply someone who had met Mr. Kearney online, chatted with him, and then begun to form a bond. Little did Ms. Gaetani realize, however, that, by virtue of a simple twist of fate, Kearney's pillow talk related to Karen Read and Josh Levy having direct contact, FBI agents, and civil rights probes of the State Police would put her directly in the middle of an unholy conflagration that was, on the night of December 23rd, 2023, about to take a turn that would change the course of history for an untold number of human lives. For, you see, in the weeks leading up to Christmas of 2023, the State Police discovered that Ms. Gaetani had information about Karen Read and TurtleBoy being in direct communication (along with information that Read and Josh Levy spoke directly). See those documents here - That, in turn, meant Ms. Gaetani was going to be forced to provide testimony at a Grand Jury scheduled for the week after Christmas (roughly December 26th, 2023). When Kearney found out this news, on or around December 22nd, it sent him into a tailspin (for good reason, it turns out, as what Mr. Kearney did next would, over time, lead to him being kicked out of Karen Read's inner circle and sent to jail...or, as Kearney says it, "...[that night] was a very expensive trip to [the city where Lindsey lives.]" Leveraging a very difficult time in Ms. Gaetani's life, Kearney demanded he be able to visit her, at home, late at night on December 23rd of 2023. Then, Kearney forced Gaetani to allow Kearney to review the contents of her phone (specifically her messages with Kate Peter) and take notes (using an ongoing medical situation that Gaetani was going through as leverage to get permission to do so). However, after Gaetani raised an objection to Kearney taking those notes, and after Gaetani retrieved her own notepad (that Kearney had used to take said notes) Kearney entirely lost his cool, pushed Gaetani onto a couch, and then began illegally recording her with his phone (an audio file Kearney would later try to edit in order to suggest Gaetani had consented to the recording, although that plan failed when a copy of the original recording, without the line about consent, was introduced into the court record). That, in turn, led to Kearney being criminally charged (again) with witness intimidation, illegal interception of an oral communication and assault and, as a result, a warrant to arrest (with probable cause) was issued. Kearney, after being a self-admitted "fugitive" from justice for multiple days with the warrant active, then turned himself in to authorities and was sent to jail after a Judge in Dedham district court revoked Kearney's bond as a result of the new charges involving Gaetani. See the post where Kearney admitted to being a fugitive here - See full coverage of the moment Kearney's bail was revoked here - In turn, Kearney then spent the next 60 days in jail (in protective custody, per my sources, because of his status as a federal informant) and, during that time, Kearney has confirmed that he would have been able to "walk free" if he "flipped" on Karen Read in the context of an ongoing conspiracy and witness intimidation probe into the pair of star-crossed attention seekers. However, Kearney did not do so and, in turn, was released from jail in late February of 2023 after serving the full 60 days on his bail revocation. For Ms. Read, however, a newly-leaked series of text messages confirm that, even thought Kearney stayed loyal and sent love-letters begging Read's forgiveness while locked up, the incident on the 23rd with Lindsey was Karen's red line and Kearney had been cut off from Read's inner circle. See that leaked text message (from March 3rd) here - Interestingly, on one of the first day's that TurtleBoy was out of jail (February 26th, 2024), I captured this fascinating moment where Karen clearly is uncomfortable around Kearney (she entirely ignores his presence outside of court and her lawyer, Alan Jackson, puts his arm on Karen's back to gently tug her away from Kearney as they walk by his hallowed-shell) - And, even more interestingly, it was also on the same day (2/26/24) that Lindsey Gaetani (under mysterious circumstances that, again, trace back to Kate Peter being shady) attended a court hearing, wherein, because of Gaetani's active restraining order on Kearney, Kearney was forced to leave the courtroom during Karen's case (and, on this same day, Kearney was also charged with a violation of that RO for hiding in the bushes outside of the court after being asked to leave the area by authorities). See video of that day here - However, sadly, I believe Gaetani's "usefulness" also quickly ended around this time as Kearney, within weeks, got his RO amended to allow TurtleBoy to attend any court hearing in the Commonwealth (even with Lindsey present) and, furthermore, the pressure tactics to get Kearney to "flip" on Karen Read had failed. Furthermore, because Karen was now in fear of TurtleBoy (having cut Aiden off), I believe Peter, Tully and the Norfolk DA took an entirely new direction. They would try to get Karen Read to cooperate regarding the ongoing investigations into TurtleBoy. This move, however, had unintended consequences (in particular for Lindsey Gaetani). In what I believe was a colloquial "crime of opportunity" -- and because Gaetani was no longer "useful" for the purposes of pressuring Kearney into a plea or for the purposes of keeping Kearney away from Karen Read hearings -- Kate Peter came up with a new idea: Kate, before knowing anyone else in the case, was connected with Jen McCabe (a witness in the Read trial who heard Karen confess to hitting John O'Keefe and who was tormented by TurtleBoy, for months, as a result of her willingness to testify on behalf of justice for John). Kate, also, had extensive connections to a network of Discord operatives who use fake profiles and hunt down bad people on the internet (again, a noble calling). However, I believe Kate weaponized some of those people (including someone named Father Mark Murphy, who used a fake profile called "The Jennings Report" and a parking clerk named Jason Broyles who moonlights as a woman online named "Hailey W.") to, in a last ditch effort now that Lindsey had no other use and because TurtleBoy could not be stopped, deflect the attention of TurtleBoy's fans (known as "TurtleRiders") away from Jen McCabe and onto --an unwitting and entirely innocent-- Lindsey Gaetani). What makes this even more shocking is that the way public attention was deflect onto Lindsey involved, what I believe, was an operation (run by Kate) to leak sensitive documents about Lindsey (along with other private information) to those fake profiles (including Jason Broyles, who Kate Peter has known since 2019). Interestingly, Broyles (and Murphy) began operations targeting Lindsey, and her support network/allies, right around the end of February, 2023 (and, interestingly, those accounts, for months, went out of their way to avoid mentioning Kate Peter or Jen McCabe, nearly entirely). Read more about the fake "Jennings Report" profile here - and read more about the disturbing tactics deployed by Jason Broyles here - and here - Anyway, that entire fiasco was the subtext (that I referenced in earlier posts) behind my question to Karen Read, in April of 2024, regarding whether Karen wanted to apologize to Lindsey for what was happening (as, by that point, Karen knew full well what it was like to become the target of Aiden's ire simply because Karen had cut him off). Karen may not have responded to my question, but she is a smart person (really, I don't mean that gratuitously: Read plays on a level I don't think most of us understand, and she does it by hiding in plain sight) and Karen knew exactly what I was talking about (she probably could have written this post herself, in fact, but she probably wouldn't have said as much about her gilt as to John's death). See video of me asking Karen that pointed question here - So, where does that leave us? Well: 1) In my view, Karen Read is vulnerable, concerned about what Aiden will do to her and her family, running out of money, and constantly at risk of having her conversations with TurtleBoy and other insiders (past and present leaked). Karen, after she loses her appeal at the SJC, is likely to look for a way to take a plea and cooperate against Aiden (Robert Cosgrove, the new special prosecutor in the Read/Kearney cases, and Hank Brennan, the new ADA in Read's murder trial, are serious legal heavy hitters and Read is in deep trouble, in my view). 2) Likewise, I think Brian Tully and Kate Peter are also deeply concerned because they didn't realize the FBI is, in reality, probably coming for them (and it has nothing to do with John O'Keefe's death, but instead it has everything to do with Kate and Tully's actions between the fall of 2023 and the summer/fall of 2024 and, also, probably Tully's actions in the context of the Sandra Birchmore investigation). I think this is why Peter is facing so many state-level criminal charges (despite trying to use her connections to get those cases to "go away" and, even in one case, managing to get the Norfolk DA not to recuse itself related to one of those charges, despite a special prosecutor being assigned to Peter's other criminal cases in the jurisdiction because of her connection to the State Police and the DA). 3) I think a lot of people are trying to keep Lindsey Gaetani and her story away from the media, and away from documentaries/podcasts that they do not control, in order to hide this information from the public, punish Lindsey for "knowing" Aiden, and insulate Peter and Brian Tully from accountability. I do not think this strategy is going to work because, and I cannot understate this enough, Lindsey is actually a genius (and none of you can see it, because you're blinded by greed, ego, jealously or otherwise). 4) I think, at the end of the day, Karen Read killed John O'Keefe, while Karen was drunk driving, at 12:31am on 1/29/22 by hitting John with her SUV and then leaving John to die. In turn, I think Karen was mad that people "flipped on her" related to Karen's actions that night, and, in turn, Karen leveraged her political connections (which I don't fully understand, but which I think are based in the intelligence community) to "punish" the Norfolk DA and the State Police Troopers who uncovered said evidence of Karen's guilt. Little did Karen realize, all the way back in November of 2022, that she had stumbled onto overlapping social circles of power that, when the dust settles, would have been consumed by their hubris --and wanton disregard for the memory of John O'Keefe-- regardless. "Remember," dear friends and readers, "it's about Justice For John." I'm a towel, and that's what I think happened (as of November, 2024). Usual disclaimer: I am a towel, not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. You are reading social media. Get a lawyer if you have questions about the law.

Grant Smith Ellis

28,671 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

COMMONS HOUSING SELECT COMMITTEE: STATEMENT FROM FREE LEASEHOLDERS 3/3/26 Today, we told Parliament the truth. About the cynical games Conservative and Labour governments have been playing with your homes, money and lives. It was awkward. We had to motor through to cover as many points as humanely possible in a short time. Sorry if we didn’t cover yours. We are the insurgents against a very closed and broken political system. We will go away when they finally free the people from the property servitude of leasehold. Until then, we will keep challenging the official line and holding power to account, however uncomfortable that may be. Parliament has been talking about abolishing leasehold, a legacy of serfdom, since the 1880s, before working men and women had the right to vote. In 2026, we keep hearing it’s “complicated” and our politicians need more time because they might get sued by the wealthy landowners. What happened to the will of the people? Isn’t Parliament sovereign? Wasn’t that what all the Brexit lark was about? And doesn’t this Labour government have the second biggest parliamentary majority in its 126-year history as the so-called working people’s party? Keir Starmer can do a TikTok stunt on ground rents. But he can’t run away from the truth. His government are peddling a draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill that has been purged of policies that you voted for in the The Labour Party manifesto. Policies promised again in the July 2024 King’s Speech: the remaining Law Commission enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations. So you can finally “take back control”. The Starmer administration appears to be captured by the deep-pocketed freeholder lobby and property cartels. And the Prime Minister is in thrall to the hand-wringing lawyers who bleat on about the risk of judicial review and ECHR lawfare, as if the rights of extortionists, many offshore, and lofty international law matter more than the British people being looted in their homes and what election manifestos have promised time and time again. This government claims that they are ending the feudal leasehold system. Instead, they keep it on life support by protecting money-for-nothing ground rents until 2068. We’ll have flying cars before feudalism is banished from our homes! And buried away in the small print, the Labour government concedes our point: “leasehold as a tenure will not disappear overnight and it will be a feature of the housing market for many years to come.” The government is also siding with the leasehold grifters by failing to restrict development value in the draft legislation, which means many flat leaseholders will never be able to afford to buy their freehold, something that must happen before conversion to commonhold. Remember, the freeholders’ main lobby group, the Residential Freehold Association, admits that the typical freeholder owns just 2.5% capital value in a block of flats. These wealth-destroying corporates own a sliver of our homes and have the cheek to talk about their human rights. We are not Mugabeists. We will, of course, pay a fair rate to compensate the freeholder to leave our homes for good. But demanding more of our money so they can thwart our right to buy them out, on the basis that they could theoretically build a skyscraper in the garden, is taking the mick and must end, as the government first promised in 2021. Don’t take our word on the scam of freeholders invoking development value to block leaseholders’ bid for self-rule. Barrister Nicola Muir, of Tanfield Chambers, has written that “it is amazing what developments landlords believe are possible and the profits they claim they will generate”, citing a telling example from practice: “The landlord initially claimed £34 million for the alleged potential to build a skyscraper in the front garden of the block. Such claims can obviously be a deterrent to leaseholders, who probably have no intention of developing.” And we were the ONLY campaign group that urged the Housing, Communities & Local Government Committee to ensure that this government sets enfranchisement rates high in the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, to the benefit of leaseholders. There is a major risk that, due to the influence peddling of ground rent grifters and their lobbyists in Westminster and Whitehall, the government will fail to implement these long-awaited reforms already on the statute books. Matthew Pennycook MP promised in November 2024 to put enfranchisement rates out to public consultation last summer, but it never happened. And if the government is forced to begin the enfranchisement changes in the 2024 Act, it will likely set the deferment and capitalisation rates artificially low, stuffing freeholders’ mouths with gold when desperate leaseholders try to extend their leases or buy out the freehold. These deferment and capitalisation rates are already derived from freeholder-friendly case law, specifically the 2006 Upper Tribunal decision known as Sportelli, with the deferment rate set at 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%. While the 2024 Act is vague on what these rates should be, we know that investors routinely buy freeholds at auction or directly from developers at higher rates than those implied by Sportelli, meaning they pay significantly less than leaseholders are already required to pay under statutory schemes with the low Sportelli rates. For example, an analysis of Allsop Ground Rent Auctions found that investors have been paying an average 9% capitalisation rate for the ground rent in freehold titles – well above Sportelli’s 6%. This situation is clearly unfair, and there is significant industry lobbying to keep the deferment and capitalisation rates low, i.e. below the going market rates, so that freeholders are excessively compensated by leaseholders. Once the rates are set in the 2024 Act, they remain fixed for ten years, creating jeopardy that they will be set to the disadvantage of leaseholders, who are less organised and resourced than industry interests to influence policy. If the rates are set substantially below Sportelli rates, the savings from other provisions of the 2024 Act – such as the removal of marriage value, the 0.1% restriction on ground rents, and the end of the requirement to pay the freeholder’s reasonable legal and valuation costs – would be more than cancelled out, leaving leaseholders paying more than they do today under the current rules. Minister Pennycook highlighted this risk while in opposition during the passage of the 2024 Act, stating that Labour “remain[s] convinced that this government, or a future one, could be lobbied by vested interests to set a deferment rate that will be punitive to leaseholders.” He proposed an amendment on the deferment rate to guide the Secretary of State, requiring that “in setting the deferment rate, the Secretary of State must have regard to the desirability of encouraging leaseholders to extend their lease at the lowest possible cost”, although the amendment was not passed. This policy ought to be in the draft Bill, yet it remains absent. We are urging that the 2024 Act be amended to require that the enfranchisement rates must not fall below an absolute floor of the existing Sportelli rates (with the deferment rate of 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%). But leaseholders should really benefit from market rates, i.e. those which developers and investors already enjoy being significantly above Sportelli, to ensure that they do not pay excessive compensation to freeholders, as occurs under the current system, to buy their freehold or extend a lease. And this isn’t just about what goes into the algorithm for the online enfranchisement calculator under the 2024 Act, or about ending the development value scam, a reform dropped from the legislation after behind-the-scenes lobbying. We will not accept a failure to bring forward a Universal Right to Manage, as part of a glidepath to commonhold. Watch what our founder said about a well-connected landlord and tenant barrister who bragged to the property tribunal last year that he had worked on the Law Commission’s Right to Manage reforms, all while representing an offshore billionaire freeholder trying to block leaseholders’ quest for Right to Manage. It should be easy. But the leaseholders at this development had to spend £150,000 just to defend their no-fault right against this legal onslaught at the First-tier Tribunal. They won, but the freeholder is now appealing… Beyond Right to Manage reform, we need a Right to Participate in collective enfranchisement so that all flat leaseholders can buy a share of the freehold even if they miss out the first time when one group of neighbours has enough support to enfranchise the block. It is unfair for leaseholders to be locked out of decisions over the charges they pay and the services affecting their home when they are ready to buy their share of the freehold. Sorting this inequity was the will of Parliament with Right to Enfranchise provisions in the 2002 Act. It’s also what the Law Commission originally recommended before seemingly being pressured by vested interests to drop the policy from their final recommendations in 2020. Also, why on earth should leaseholders have to contort themselves to get 50% support of all unit-owners in a block? Satisfying the onerous 50% participation threshold is near impossible in bigger buildings and those with high levels of buy-to-let, yet scummy investors face no qualifying criteria when hoovering up the freeholds of our homes from developers or auctioneers behind our backs. Don’t patronise us with Lord Best’s scheme for managing agents. We want liberation, not regulation. There’s a reason both the freeholder and managing agent lobbies are gagging for the cosy Lord Best policy, which wasn’t promised in either the Labour manifesto or the King’s Speech. It will jack up leaseholders’ already sky-high service charges, repeat the cruel joke of the Building Safety Regulator, and keep freeholders and their managing agent cronies firmly in the ecosystem. At the same time, a statutory regulator of managing agents will no doubt restrict competition by keeping out small ethical new entrants. It will also allow the government to claim job done while failing to end leasehold. Even without leasehold abolition, leaseholders will still be denied rightful control of their service charges and the power to easily sack their managing agent - the real regulation needed to rein in rip-off service providers and put them out of business, not some powerless or captured regulator in Whitehall. Labour should be for the grafters. If the government wants to win back public support after the Gordon and Denton by-election drubbing, salvaging this draft legislation and swiftly commencing the 2024 Act must be its priority. Show that politics can be a force for good. Stand up to the ground rent grifters and offshore property mafia. Free leaseholders. 5.3 million households in England and Wales are watching.

Free Leaseholders

21,063 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

$MU $SNDK $LITE $VRT NVIDIA and Groq: 2nd and 3rd Order Strategic Infrastructure Effects and Market Implications Public reporting indicates NVIDIA has agreed to acquire Groq for approximately $20,000,000,000 in cash, while excluding Groq’s nascent cloud business from the transaction perimeter. The reported carve-out materially constrains the immediate, direct linkage from the acquisition to incremental, NVIDIA-controlled data center capacity build-out because GroqCloud appears to be the principal channel through which Groq hardware is currently monetized at scale as a service. The infrastructure-market implications therefore depend primarily on post-close product strategy: whether NVIDIA (1) commercializes Groq silicon as a distinct inference product line and drives broad deployment through OEM/ODM channels and partners, (2) uses the acquisition mainly to absorb IP and talent while de-emphasizing standalone Groq hardware volumes, or (3) uses Groq technology to reshape NVIDIA’s own inference systems and networking roadmaps. The dominant transmission mechanism into memory, networking, and facility infrastructure markets is the degree to which NVIDIA shifts incremental inference deployments away from GPU architectures that are tightly coupled to external high-bandwidth memory (HBM) and toward Groq’s current architecture, which emphasizes large on-chip SRAM, deterministic compiler-scheduled execution, and direct chip-to-chip connectivity. Independent and company-published materials describe Groq’s current-generation approach as having no external memory, keeping weights and KV cache on-chip during processing, and requiring model sharding across multiple chips due to limited on-chip SRAM per device. That architectural choice is directionally HBM-negative on a per-accelerator basis and ambiguous for DRAM, NAND, networking, power, and cooling on a per-token basis because the design can reduce memory wall losses and tail-latency overhead while potentially increasing the number of chips and interconnect endpoints required to serve large models and long-context workloads. HBM implications are the most mechanically straightforward but should be framed as second-derivative rather than absolute. If Groq-class inference silicon meaningfully displaces NVIDIA GPU-based inference deployments, incremental HBM bit demand tied to inference growth could be reduced relative to a GPU-only baseline because Groq’s current approach does not appear to attach HBM stacks to each accelerator. However, current market structure suggests HBM remains supply-constrained and is being pulled by multiple vectors including continued GPU training scale and high-capacity inference configurations, with leading suppliers signaling tight conditions extending beyond 2026. In that environment, reduced inference-driven HBM intensity could primarily reallocate scarce HBM supply toward higher-end training and premium inference GPUs rather than creating an outright volume collapse, preserving high utilization of HBM capacity while potentially affecting the slope of pricing power and capacity expansion urgency over a multi-year horizon. The key downside scenario for the HBM complex would be a durable architectural bifurcation where “good-enough” inference shifts disproportionately to HBM-less ASICs across a broad swath of deployments (latency-sensitive, batch-1, cost-per-token optimized), while training remains GPU-HBM dominated; such a split would reduce the portion of future inference compute that naturally monetizes through HBM content and could compress the incremental HBM-per-AI-dollar ratio. The key upside/neutral scenario for HBM is that the supply chain remains fully allocated regardless, with NVIDIA using any “freed” HBM to ship more high-end GPUs into training and long-context inference, especially as roadmaps increase HBM per GPU, sustaining robust aggregate bit demand even if inference becomes more heterogeneous. Conventional DRAM implications split into 2 channels: (1) DRAM wafer capacity diversion into HBM and (2) DDR content per server in AI clusters. Supplier commentary indicates that AI-driven memory demand is supporting elevated DRAM markets more broadly, and HBM production is resource-intensive versus conventional DRAM, tightening supply for DDR products in parallel. A meaningful NVIDIA pivot to an inference architecture that reduces HBM dependence could, at the margin, ease the most acute HBM-driven bottlenecks and allow memory manufacturers more flexibility in balancing DRAM mix, which could be modestly DDR-positive on the supply side (less crowding-out) even if it is DDR-neutral or slightly negative on the demand side (if per-node CPU/DDR requirements decline due to more efficient accelerator utilization). The dominant practical outcome is likely that DDR demand remains supported by broad AI server proliferation and increasing memory footprints at the system level (CPUs, networking stacks, caching layers, retrieval-augmented pipelines), while HBM remains the premium profit pool; therefore, any HBM displacement that increases total server volumes could indirectly keep DDR demand resilient even if DDR per accelerator is not rising materially. NAND flash implications are comparatively indirect and volume-driven rather than architecture-driven. Inference clusters require SSD capacity for model storage, container images, logging, and increasingly for fast local retrieval indices and embedding stores, but the storage footprint per unit of compute is typically smaller than in training pipelines that stage large datasets and checkpoints. If NVIDIA uses Groq to lower inference cost and latency enough to expand the total number of inference deployment locations (regional colocation, enterprise on-prem, sovereign footprints), aggregate SSD attach could rise through geographic fragmentation and replication of model artifacts across more sites, even if per-site storage is modest. The NAND effect is therefore likely to be demand-broadening and mix-positive (datacenter SSDs) but not a primary swing factor versus the macro AI capex cycle and consumer/device cycles. Hard disk drive (HDD) markets should see negligible direct sensitivity because nearline HDD demand is driven by bulk storage and cloud archiving economics, while inference acceleration choices primarily reshape compute and network layers; any HDD benefit would be a tertiary function of overall data center square footage expansion rather than a direct consequence of Groq silicon displacing GPUs. Optical networking implications require separating (1) intra-cluster back-end fabrics that connect accelerators and (2) front-end / data center interconnect (DCI) that connects sites and regions. Groq’s own positioning and third-party reporting suggest scaling beyond a single node or rack relies on high-bandwidth fabrics and, in some described configurations, optical interconnect scaling across hundreds of chips. If NVIDIA commercializes Groq at scale, 2 offsetting forces emerge: lower cost-per-token and improved latency could expand inference throughput and drive more east-west traffic, increasing demand for high-speed switching and optics; conversely, if Groq delivers materially higher utilization and tokens per unit of network bandwidth for certain workloads, the network required per served token could decline. Public NVIDIA materials already indicate an aggressive photonics roadmap aimed at scaling AI factories, including co-packaged optics (CPO) switches and explicit collaboration with Coherent and Lumentum in the silicon photonics supply chain. That linkage is important because it suggests that, independent of Groq, NVIDIA is already pushing optics integration deeper into the switch package to reduce power and increase resiliency; Groq increases the strategic incentive to reduce network power and latency if inference becomes even more distributed and latency-sensitive. For Lumentum and Coherent specifically, the net implication is less about “more optics versus fewer optics” and more about a shift in optics form factor and value capture. Co-packaged optics can reduce reliance on pluggable transceivers in some switch architectures while increasing demand for integrated photonic engines, lasers, fiber attach, packaging processes, and component-level supply. NVIDIA’s own announcements explicitly position Coherent and Lumentum as collaborators in creating the integrated silicon/optics process and supply chain for photonics switches. If Groq accelerates the transition to very large-scale fabrics (more endpoints, higher port speeds, tighter power envelopes), that tends to pull forward CPO adoption and amplifies demand for the underlying photonics components even if the conventional pluggable module TAM is structurally pressured over time. If Groq instead pushes inference toward smaller, more localized pods (closer to users, more regional colocation), that can be optics-positive for DCI and metro connectivity because more sites must be interconnected at high bandwidth with low latency, favoring coherent optics and high-speed interconnect between facilities. The principal risk for optics suppliers is timing and margin structure: a faster move to NVIDIA-driven integrated photonics could concentrate bargaining power and compress margins for commoditized transceiver modules while favoring suppliers with differentiated lasers, integration capability, and qualification depth in NVIDIA’s CPO ecosystem. AEC and copper interconnect implications hinge on whether Groq deployment increases the density of short-reach links inside racks and rows. High-speed copper remains structurally advantaged at very short distances on cost, power, and serviceability, but reaches become constrained as lane speeds and aggregate bandwidth rise, creating a role for active electrical cables (AECs), retimers, and signal-conditioning silicon. Credo explicitly positions its AEC products as enabling reliable lossless 800G connectivity for AI clusters, and the company has highlighted participation at NVIDIA GTC with content focused on extending PCIe/CXL using AECs, indicating relevance to next-generation system topologies that require longer reach and higher signal integrity than passive copper can deliver. If NVIDIA turns Groq into a widely deployed inference card or chassis product, the likely near-term effect is AEC-positive because (1) more inference throughput tends to increase top-of-rack connectivity requirements, (2) distributing inference across more racks and sites increases short-reach links per unit of delivered service, and (3) PCIe-attached accelerator architectures tend to require robust signal conditioning as systems move to PCIe 6.x and beyond. Groq workshop materials explicitly reference GroqCard and GroqNode form factors, reinforcing that PCIe-attached deployment has been central to Groq’s current packaging strategy. The main countervailing risk is that Groq’s deterministic chip-to-chip fabric could be implemented primarily through backplanes and direct board-level connectivity that reduces the need for merchant AECs inside the box; in that case, incremental AEC demand would concentrate more in rack-to-switch and node-to-fabric links rather than within-chassis chip fabrics. Astera Labs implications are connectivity-architecture sensitive and, on balance, skew positive if NVIDIA increases heterogeneity and disaggregation in AI systems. NVIDIA has publicly positioned NVLink Fusion as a pathway for partners to build semi-custom AI infrastructure and has explicitly identified Astera Labs as a partner in that ecosystem, with Astera describing NVLink-related solutions expanding its connectivity platform across PCIe, CXL, and Ethernet plus fleet observability software. A Groq acquisition increases the probability that NVIDIA offers a broader menu of accelerators (training GPUs, inference-focused ASICs) and therefore increases the importance of scalable, high-reliability connectivity, retiming, switching, and telemetry across mixed topologies. If Groq silicon remains PCIe-attached in many deployments, PCIe 6.x retimers/switches and active cable modules become more central, aligning with Astera’s core portfolio. If NVIDIA instead integrates Groq concepts into scale-up fabrics (NVLink-like domains) or uses Groq to expand into inference “appliances” that must be rapidly deployed in colocation environments, the need for standard-compliant, serviceable connectivity with strong RAS/telemetry increases, again aligning with Astera’s positioning. Power equipment and cooling implications for Vertiv and adjacent suppliers should be viewed through the lens of rack power density, cooling modality (air vs liquid), and site deployment model (hyperscale campuses vs distributed colocation/enterprise). Groq claims its LPU and rack designs are “air-cooled by design” and require no complex cooling and power infrastructure, and third-party reporting has described Groq’s approach as relying on parallelism across many lower-power units rather than extreme per-chip performance. If NVIDIA scales Groq as a mainstream inference platform, the mix of data center cooling spend could shift modestly away from the highest-density liquid-cooled racks toward more air-cooled or hybrid deployments, particularly for inference pods placed in existing facilities that cannot easily retrofit for very high rack heat flux. That would be a mix headwind for suppliers most levered exclusively to high-end liquid cooling attachments per rack, but it is not necessarily a volume headwind for Vertiv given the company’s broad exposure to both power and cooling infrastructure and the likelihood that total AI deployment locations expand. Vertiv’s own industry commentary emphasizes that AI racks require higher power-density UPS, batteries, power distribution equipment, and switchgear capable of handling rapid load transients, and that hybrid cooling systems will evolve across deployment environments. Those statements align with a world where inference growth increases the count of powered racks and raises the operational complexity of power delivery even if per-rack density is lower than the most extreme training clusters. The most material infrastructure impact may occur outside the rack and upstream of the data hall: grid interconnects, substations, transformers, switchgear, generators, and utility-scale generation additions. Recent regulatory actions in the U.S. highlight that projected data center demand is already driving large planned increases in electricity generation capacity, underscoring that power availability is a binding constraint. In that context, an inference architecture that lowers joules per token could reduce the power required per unit of inference delivered, but it can also accelerate demand by lowering cost and improving latency, increasing the total volume of inference served (a classic rebound effect). The net outcome is likely continued, elevated demand for power infrastructure even if efficiency improves, with the key swing factor being whether AI capex remains on a multi-year growth trajectory or enters a digestion phase. Other data center infrastructure implications include server/ODM mix, facility design standardization, and networking architecture choices. If NVIDIA positions Groq-based inference as a broadly distributable “standard server + accelerator” solution rather than as an integrated, liquid-cooled rack like GB200 NVL72, spend could shift toward more conventional air-cooled server designs, higher unit volumes of mainstream racks, and faster deployment in colocation footprints, increasing demand for modular power rooms, busways, and rapidly deployable cooling solutions. If NVIDIA instead integrates Groq into its “AI factory” paradigm, the primary effect is likely acceleration of dense back-end fabric build-outs and a faster push toward photonics switching, increasing demand for fiber plant, connectors, and integrated optics supply chains while potentially compressing the lifecycle of transitional architectures based on pluggable optics and mid-reach copper. NVIDIA’s stated roadmap toward co-packaged optics and silicon photonics switches is already oriented toward scaling to very large GPU counts; adding a high-end inference ASIC increases the strategic importance of power-efficient, low-latency fabrics because inference economics become increasingly sensitive to network overhead as compute cost declines. Across the covered segments, the most defensible base case is limited near-term dislocation and a medium-term increase in uncertainty around memory intensity per unit of inference growth. HBM faces the clearest relative risk from an HBM-less inference platform, but supply tightness and GPU training roadmaps reduce the probability of an absolute demand shock over the next 12–24 months. Optical, AEC/copper, and power/cooling are more likely to remain volume-supported because they scale with endpoint count, deployment fragmentation, and total data center footprint, and those tend to rise when inference becomes cheaper and more widely deployed. The highest-conviction second-order effect is a shift in infrastructure mix: incrementally more distributed inference deployments (favoring colocation power/cooling standardization, DCI optics, and serviceable short-reach interconnect) and a gradual migration from pluggable optics toward integrated photonics in back-end fabrics (favoring suppliers positioned in the CPO ecosystem).

TheValueist

76,179 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Scott Pio, Chairman of the Republican Party of Loudoun, Calls for Immediate Resignation of RPV Leadership Following Devastating 2025 Election Losses Leesburg, VA – November 10, 2025 – In the wake of the Republican Party's crushing defeats in Virginia's 2025 statewide elections, Scott Pio, Chairman of the Republican Party of Loudoun, today issued a urgent call for the immediate resignation of Mark Peake, Chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia (RPV), the executive leadership, and every member of the State Central Committee who has worked as a consultant or company in the last 5 years for any candidate or PAC in Virginia. This demand comes as Democrats swept the governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general races, marking a complete takeover of statewide executive offices and signaling a profound failure of RPV leadership. "The results of Tuesday's election are not just disappointing—they are a damning indictment of the RPV's entrenched leadership," said Scott Pio. "For too long, the RPV has operated as a dysfunctional entity, prioritizing personal gain and complacency over growth, strategy, and victory. The fault for these losses lies squarely at the feet of the current RPV Chairman, executive leadership, and State Central Committee members who have allowed the party to atrophy while Democrats built a formidable machine. If they had any sense of accountability, they would step down immediately to allow fresh, competent leadership to rebuild our party from the ground up." Scott Pio outlined the following reasons for the demanded resignations, each highlighting systemic failures under the current RPV leadership: • Current Vote Counts in Statewide Races: Due to the abysmal performance in the 2025 elections, where Democrat Abigail Spanberger defeated Republican Winsome Earle-Sears for Governor with approximately 57% to 42% of the vote; Democrat Ghazala Hashmi defeated Republican John Reid for Lieutenant Governor with roughly 55% to 44%; and Democrat Jay Jones defeated Republican Jason Miyares for Attorney General with about 52% to 46%. These lopsided results, with Republicans failing to break 50% in any statewide contest, reflect a complete strategic collapse and an inability to mobilize voters, directly attributable to the RPV's poor planning and execution. With the numbers as you see them below, Winsome would have had to perform at Donald Trump levels to defeat Abigail. Winsome would never have the chance to win unless the Republican Party is working to convert voters and grow the party. Glenn Youngkin would have lost against Abigail having it been a re-election. Republicans are outnumbered in Virginia. We MUST start converting and growing the party to overcome these odds, less we suffer the same fate as Oregon, Washington, California, Maryland and Pennsylvania. Winsome Sears – 1,434,133 Abigail Spanberger – 1,921,045 Donald Trump – 2,075,085 Kamala Harris – 2,335,395 Glenn Youngkin – 1,663,158 Terry McAuliffe – 1,599,470 • Loss of Confidence from Grassroots Leadership: Grassroots Republicans across Virginia have lost all faith in the RPV due to repeated betrayals and neglect. Local party chairs, volunteers, and activists feel abandoned, as the state leadership has prioritized insider dealings over empowering the base, leading to widespread disillusionment and low turnout that sealed our electoral fate. • Loss of Strategic Vision and Failure to Learn from 2017: The RPV has shown no ability to adapt since 2017, when Republicans squandered a supermajority in the House of Delegates, narrowly holding onto control before hemorrhaging nearly 30 seats over the ensuing decade. This pattern of complacency—ignoring shifting demographics, urban-suburban trends, and voter priorities—has turned Virginia from a battleground into a Democratic stronghold under the current leadership. Virginia will continue to be blue until we stop ignoring the shifting immigrant demographics. The idea that the RPV doesn’t have Instagram, YouTube or TikTok should show everyone that they seriously lack vision to persuade voters. If the RPV doesn’t start investing in converting voters, we will never be a Republican state again. • Mindset Against Party Growth: Rather than actively expanding the Republican tent through outreach and recruitment, RPV leaders have adopted a defeatist attitude, assuming existing voters would suffice without investment in new coalitions in the largest Indian, Arab and Latino minority communities. This shortsighted "wait and see" approach has allowed Democrats to outpace us in voter registration, permanent absentee registration and engagement, directly contributing to our statewide wipeout. If the statewide party continues to ignore the Arab, Indian and Latino voters, then it will forever lose Virginia. There is NO turning back if we shut those voters out of our American Freedom Party. • Ignoring Internal Polling Warnings: Internal statewide polling undoubtedly revealed the dire state of our campaigns months ago, yet leadership failed to pivot, allocate resources differently, or address vulnerabilities. This willful blindness to data and refusal to course-correct exemplifies a leadership team more interested in using old, tired techniques rather than winning. Their ineffective strategies of holding rally after rally in half empty halls while 1 mile away from polling precincts MUST come to an end. They should be kissing babies and shaking hands rather than standing on a stage. • Leaving Uncontested Seats: In a shocking display of negligence, the RPV left 15 seats uncontested in the 2025 House of Delegates elections and 20 in 2023, handing Democrats free wins and demoralizing potential candidates. This failure to field slates in all districts underscores a profound lack of recruitment effort and organizational incompetence. Enhanced data and technologies make this task rather easy while the voters suffer. Each House of Delegate seat represents nearly 60,000 voters. Ignoring 900,000 voters in 2025 and 1,200,000 voters in 2023 could be the difference between a statewide victory or statewide defeat. • Lack of Training and Resources for Candidates and Committees: RPV leadership has provided minimal training, funding, or logistical support to candidates and committees, leaving them to fend for themselves against well-resourced Democratic opponents. Without workshops on messaging, fundraising, or voter outreach, our nominees were set up for failure from the start. The consistent neglect of these foundational basic things, there is no wonder why seats go unfilled across the state. With the incredible lack of support for our candidates and committees, you must ask yourself if candidates or committees could even be effective? • Consultant-Plagued State Central Committee: With consultants making millions off our donors, candidates and committees, it is no wonder why they seek these elected positions of influence. The State Central Committee is riddled with consultants who view the party as a personal ATM, prioritizing lucrative contracts over electoral success. These self-serving members have blocked accountability measures and reforms, ensuring the RPV remains a gravy train rather than a winning operation while the executive director has taken over $700,000 in salary and reimbursements. The old adage that “No matter if the candidate wins or loses, the consultant keeps getting paid” rings true for our elected state central committee members. The conflict of interest in working for candidates while also being in an elected position capable of leading a ship is disgusting. • Uneven Support for Statewide Candidates: The RPV failed to deliver consistent, dedicated backing to all statewide candidates, favoring some while neglecting others. This fragmented approach left gaps in coordination, messaging, and fieldwork, allowing Democrats to dominate the narrative and airwaves. Every single House of Delegate candidate should be provided with the same exact support as other candidates. Every two years the RPV should be raising a war chest of cash to hand out “starter” checks to each of the 100 House of Delegate Candidates running for office. Whether it be $1,000, $2,500 or $5,000. Each candidate that is willing to run under the Republican flag deserves our support. • Deficiencies in Technology, Machinery, and Donor Relations: Without modern technology platforms, in house tools, user-friendly guides, or robust donor networks, the RPV has handicapped candidates statewide. Outdated systems and poor relationship management have resulted in inefficient operations and insufficient funding, putting Republicans at a severe disadvantage. Relying on consultants to do work that could be done in house wastes time and extremely valuable donor dollars. Without investments in machinery and technology, the RPV severely lacks the ability to compete against any opponent in this century. • Fundamentally Broken Organization: The RPV has failed to transform into a lean, mean activist machine, instead remaining bloated and bureaucratic. The RPV lacks real-world problem-solving expertise, with leaders disconnected from practical goal-setting and execution. This absence of professional management has turned the party into a relic, incapable of driving objectives like voter turnout, issue-based campaigns or goal setting outreach programs. The party should be driving goals and objectives weekly, month after month, year after year. • Failure to Leverage New Laws for Immigrant Outreach: Despite approximately 2,000,000 immigrant citizens calling Virginia home, the RPV has ignored opportunities under new state laws to engage and integrate these communities into our base. This missed chance to grow through targeted outreach represents a strategic blunder of epic proportions. The RPV should be engaging these communities weekly and supporting their causes, yet the RPV does zero community outreach. • Serious Lack of Messaging and Persuasion: The RPV has mandated itself NOT to talk policy or issues. Consultants tell candidates the less information that you share, the more chance a voter will like you. When faced with the blue media, blue messaging and blue onslaught of information, the RPV has mandated itself to remain silent. This serious miscalculation has allowed for the vacuum of communications to be managed and propagated by the left. Without a proper messaging flow like parental rights, 2nd amendment or the 1st amendment, how will voters ever know what Republicans stand for? • Unserious Leadership Exemplified by Mark Peake: State Senator Mark Peake's tenure as the Chairman of the Republican Party, marked by attending galas, posing for photos, and casually showing up on Election Day in a suit while walking his dog, epitomizes the RPV's lack of seriousness. Such performative gestures over substantive work has eroded credibility and contributed to our losses. His inability to think like an activist and drive an activist organization has caused serious damage to our work. Someone should have told Mark Peake that if he wants to be a Senator, then he can give speeches, attend galas and host parties. Activism is about real work, leading troops into battle and planning engagements. He is not an activist. While the Democratic blue wave was formidable, with sweeping victories across the board, Loudoun County Republicans bucked the trend. Under local leadership, we expanded our voter base countywide, increasing Republican vote counts even as statewide Republican turnout retracted. Voters in Loudoun rallied behind our message, proving that with effective strategy, outreach and engagement, growth is possible. If it can be achieved in Loudoun—a diverse, competitive county—it can be replicated statewide under the right leadership at the RPV. Scott Pio warned that if Mark Peake, the executive leadership and compromised State Central resignations do not occur within 30 days, he will personally spearhead "The Mount Vernon Project," modeled after Turning Point USA's successful campaign against the RNC. When Charlie Kirk mobilized to oust Ronna McDaniel and replace complacent RNC members, it revitalized the national party. Similarly, our Mount Vernon Project will launch a full-scale effort to unseat and replace every ineffective RPV leader, restoring accountability and vigor to the Republican Party of Virginia. Importantly, Scott Pio emphasized that the campaigns of Winsome Earle-Sears, John Reid, and Jason Miyares bear no blame for their defeats. These dedicated public servants ran principled races, but were undermined by the RPV's chronic lack of long-term strategic thinking and party-building efforts. The consequences of this leadership vacuum extend far beyond politics. Due to the RPV's inaction and lack of activism, Virginia's kids, families, and communities now face four years of unchecked Democratic rule. This will threaten our First Amendment freedoms through potential censorship and overreach, erode Second Amendment rights with aggressive gun control measures, parental rights, increase drug usage in our communities with legalization of drugs, and compromise public safety by prioritizing progressive policies over law and order. "The time for excuses is over," Scott Pio concluded. "Virginia Republicans deserve better. We demand resignations now to begin the hard work of rebuilding a party that fights—and wins—for conservative values." For more information, contact the Scott Pio, the Chairman of the Republican Party of Loudoun at 703-627-5272.

Scott Pio

109,865 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

You are confusing cause and effect, and in doing so, you are missing the deeper structural reality that is the central point of the argument. Migration in Africa does not happen in a vacuum. People do not wake up and casually decide to leave their homes, families, and countries for no apparent reason. Movement of people across colonial borders is driven by economic collapse, political instability, conflict, and governance failures, yes, but also by powerful historical forces that shaped those very conditions in the first place. Not everyone has the third eye to see those historical forces at play unless they read, comprehend and follow ideas and not populist demagoguery. Apartheid was not just a South African policy that ended in 1994. Its effects still live with South Africans to this very day. It was part of a wider political and more importantly economic system of racial capitalism that structured the region’s economy. What you fixed in 1994 was only the political and not the economic side of it. South Africa was designed as the industrial hub, while neighbouring countries were deliberately underdeveloped and turned into labour reserves for South Africa’s economy. Migrant labour from countries like Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Lesotho was not an accident at all, it was built into the system. It was designed that way and remains so to this very day. The owners of the means of production then remain the owners of the means of production today. Black people are largely still workers. You have a few token black individuals at the top, but the majority remain little more than exploited labour. So when people move from their countries today, they are often moving along routes that were created decades ago. The inequality between South Africa and its neighbours did not emerge overnight, and it is not simply the result of “African leaders” in isolation of other key factors. It is the continuation of a historical economic design that concentrated wealth in one place and poverty in others. That does not absolve African governments of responsibility. Many have failed their citizens through corruption, mismanagement, and repression. I write about this daily, and I have gone to prison three times in my lifetime for doing so. I have had to leave my country to save my life for doing so. But to reduce a complex, multi-layered issue to “it is African leaders” is intellectually lazy and historically dishonest. It ignores history, economics, and global power dynamics. As for Malema, whether you agree with him or not, his political skill lies in identifying how political and economic narratives are shaped and who benefits from them. He is pointing out that anger is often redirected away from the very systems of inequality and towards vulnerable people, migrants, who did not create those conditions. If you want a serious conversation, then deal with the full picture. Migration is about history, economics, governance, and global inequality. Blaming one factor while ignoring the rest is not analysis at all, it is deceitful propaganda. The economically and intellectually illiterate are often the easiest targets of political propaganda, precisely because they are fed simple, emotionally satisfying explanations for complex structural problems. They are told who to blame for their suffering, migrants, neighbouring countries, or vague notions of “outsiders”, while the real drivers, historical dispossession, entrenched economic inequality, and elite collusion, are deliberately obscured. In Southern Africa, and particularly in South Africa, this manifests in xenophobic narratives that blame Zimbabweans or Mozambicans for unemployment and poverty, when in reality those conditions are rooted in a long standing economic architecture that concentrated wealth and ownership in very few hands. It is easier to turn the poor against the poor than to confront systems that benefit those in power. What is often forgotten in this debate is that the political elites of colonial South Africa and Rhodesia worked in concert to sustain a repressive regional system that enriched a minority while extracting labour and resources from the rest. Your former apartheid Prime Minister John Vorster says it in this video in a very tactful manner. That logic has not disappeared at all, it has merely changed form. Today, segments of the political elite in both South Africa and Zimbabwe continue to operate in ways that protect entrenched economic interests while the majority remain economically marginalised. South Africa was the only true white settler “home”, where wealth, infrastructure, and industry were concentrated, while territories like Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia), and Nyasaland (Malawi) functioned largely as economic outposts, feeding capital, labour, and raw materials into that system. The Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland was presented as a project of regional integration, but in practice it reinforced patterns of extraction, with mining in Zambia, agriculture in Zimbabwe, and labour flows from Malawi all tied into a broader economic network dominated by South African capital. The same remains to this very day. The tragedy of focusing on Julius as the messenger rather than the message is something I speak about regularly, the need to focus on ideas and not personalities. You do not have to like Julius Malema. You do not have to agree with everything he says. All you need to do is focus on his message and interrogate it critically. I am not enslaved to Julius Malema’s ideas. I pick and choose what I agree with, and I am able to articulate a reasoned argument for both what I support and what I reject. You should do the same. One of the most powerful weapons of colonialism was the deliberate fragmentation of black people into small Bantustans, into isolated villages where communities were conditioned to view the next village with suspicion. In Rhodesia we had “reserves” and “keeps.” People from other Bantustans were treated as outsiders. That mentality was never dismantled, it still exists today. The idea of seeing others with suspicion simply because of an arbitrary line, a colonial border, remains deeply entrenched. Many do not fully appreciate how powerful and enduring that mentality and conditioning is. Yet when you look at the descendants of colonialists, they do not view each other through those same lenses. White Zimbabweans move into South Africa without attracting the same hostility because of the economic architecture that allows them to stay away from the so called lumpen. White people from across the world come and settle with ease in South Africa. In fact, one of the most visible figures advocating for the secession of the Western Cape is a British citizen, yet there is no comparable outrage from black South Africans. The same energy of protests and marches that is directed at fellow Africans is rarely directed there. That is not accidental at all, it is well designed that way. It speaks to the protection afforded by entrenched economic power and privilege, but also to a deeper psychological conditioning in how black people are taught to see each other and to see whiteness. This will not disappear overnight. It may not even disappear in my lifetime. But the task is to keep planting the seeds of awareness and unity. As Bob Marley said, you give your more to get your little. What you do today may seem small, but in time it contributes to something much larger, especially if there is collective effort to confront and resolve these divisions. One of the most important things colonialists understood was that education is the key to discernment, to the ability to interrogate and understand issues such as those I raised in this essay. That is precisely why they restricted access to it. Only a few black people were allowed meaningful education, and the consequences of that exclusion remain with us today, not only in South Africa but across much of the continent. We did not dismantle the systems that underpinned colonialism. We largely inherited them, changed the faces at the top, and continued to operate within the same structures. So I will end by saying this, if anyone truly wants change on the issues being debated, you must fix the foundation. You cannot repair window panes when the foundation itself is cracking. Immigration, whether legal or illegal, will always exist, but it is sustained not by foreigners alone, but by the system itself. When Zimbabweans cross the border without passports, they are often enabled by South Africans within a broken system. When documents are obtained illegally, it is again the system that enables it. When Zimbabwe’s political crisis persists without free and fair elections, regional dynamics, including South Africa’s political and economic interests, often play a role in sustaining that status quo. There is a web of political and economic interests that mirrors, in some respects, the relationships that existed during the colonial and apartheid eras. As long as those interests remain, there is little incentive for those in power to confront injustice decisively. The corruption and governance failures in Zimbabwe are real and significant, but they are part of a broader structural problem. The real issue is the foundation. If black South Africans were living well, with access to quality education, meaningful employment, and economic security, they would not be marching in the streets. The anger you see today is not simply about immigration. It is a reflection of an economic structure that has remained fundamentally unchanged, even after 1994. Repression underpinned by racism in Rhodesia effectively came to an end when South Africa shifted its position and recognised that the system was no longer sustainable. The same principle applies today. Repression underpinned by political corruption in Zimbabwe will begin to end the day South Africa, the regional power whether one accepts it or not, decides that the current situation is no longer acceptable. Zimbabwe’s crisis has, over time, been treated as a largely domestic issue rather than a regional one, yet the political and economic realities of Southern Africa make that distinction artificial. What happens in Zimbabwe does not exist in isolation, it is shaped, sustained, and, at times, enabled by regional dynamics, particularly South Africa’s stance. This may be an uncomfortable truth, but history consistently shows that regional power centres play a decisive role in determining outcomes. Ignoring that reality does not change it, it only delays the moment when it must be confronted. It was convenient then for John Vorster and successive apartheid regimes to continue using illegal migrants as a source of cheap labour in South Africa for menial jobs. It remains the same today. As I have said, the political and economic architecture of the apartheid era largely remains in place. What has changed are the political faces, the white faces that held power then and the black faces that hold office today, often operating within and alongside the same entrenched economic structures. Whether one accepts it or not, that is the reality of our politics in the region and of the economic architecture that continues to shape it. There is a reason why certain political actors avoid critically engaging with the structural drivers of immigration, particularly those that sustain flows of cheap labour. There is also a reason why figures like Helen Zille often emphasise the need to document illegal immigrants in South Africa, that position can be understood within the broader context of preserving an economic order that has long depended on controlling and managing labour rather than fundamentally transforming the conditions that produce it. That economic order is rooted in historical structures of concentrated power that shaped not only South Africa, but the wider region more than a century ago. How black Africans view themselves is often reflected in how they respond to political messages. It is why some are quick to criticise Julius Malema for positions that are, in substance, not fundamentally different from those expressed by Helen Zille. On immigration, there is significant overlap in what has been said across the political spectrum, including by the DA and the EFF. Yet the EFF is frequently viewed through a lens of hostility, in part because it is a black-led party, and that perception shapes the reaction it receives. As a result, some black citizens, influenced by long-standing narratives, direct harsher and more emotive criticism towards it. When similar points are made by figures like Helen Zille, the response is often markedly different. That contrast speaks to deeper historical conditioning and the psychological legacy of colonialism. It has not disappeared, and changing it will take time. The fundamental difference, however, lies in the intent and framing of their messages. Malema’s position on immigration is part of a broader effort to confront and address the structural inequalities created by colonial rule. Zille’s position, by contrast, can be seen as operating within and reinforcing an existing economic framework that has its roots in that same colonial architecture which feeds off cheap migrant labour. However, you can't fix the broken system by chasing away immigrants, legal or illegal, you can only empower black South Africans by allowing them to own the means of production and not fighting in the streets for crumbs. Have a lovely weekend.

Hopewell Chin’ono

21,194 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

How to Build a Proper Product Page It breaks my heart every time I see someone from Brazil, making just $200 a month, spend $40 on a test ad only to get a $2 CPC. Then, they cut the ad at $35 spend with 17 clicks and 0 conversions. What’s even more frustrating is when I visit their site and see it’s a complete mess. It’s like they didn’t even try. That’s why I’m making this post. *Disclaimer: If you're building a brand, this isn’t for you. This is for testing products correctly with a website that’s good enough to convert, but if you’re serious about your brand, hire a Figma designer and a developer to get things done right. As a fun fact, I tested the following product myself (In the video below) and with just one click at a $3 CPC, I got a sale with an $80 AOV (100% CVR). I paused the ads because the CPMs hit $150. If you're interested, save this product for the future. I'll share the creatives i used to ran the product with those who comment below. "jordan, stop teaching high school kids about selling reps and getting them sued by Prada or other big brands, ruining their payment gateways, and crushing their dreams." (with 5 random people only will do it, wouldn't make sense for everyone to be ripping it). Shoutout to Adrian for this one. 🫡 Back to the important stuff: Let’s talk about creating a great product page. First off, ditch the “Buy Now” button. By using this, you miss out on the chance to increase your Average Order Value (AOV) through upsells during checkout. Instead, replace it with an “Add to Cart” button. Also, remove the quantity selector. Hardly anyone uses them on the product page, but they do in the cart. Instead, offer bundles, which you can set up using the Kaching Bundles app or your theme if it supports this feature. The cart experience is crucial, and you can optimize it using the UpCart app. Enable all its product page features so it takes over the standard Shopify cart or your theme’s cart. The built-in cart systems are outdated—they don’t allow upsells like UpCart does. Plus, UpCart directly opens the cart after a product is added, where the upsell option appears at the bottom, increasing your chances of boosting AOV. Pay attention to color schemes. Don’t use neutral colors for headers and buttons if your product features a primary color. A yellow jacket with a black header is like pizza with raspberry syrup—just doesn’t work. If your product images are gray, white, or black, match those with your headers and buttons. Otherwise, play around with colors to give your page some dynamic appeal. Bookmark this site to get color palettes that match your primary color. For exact color matches, download the "ColorZilla" extension, which gives you the exact color code of whatever is under your mouse on the screen. If your product color is #6E402A, you’ll know it and can match it perfectly with your header and buttons, creating a visually appealing contrast like Cider did here below. Right now, when some of you send me these websites, they look like government pages from the early 2000s. Next, consider the typography and button styles. For fonts, use Helvetica Regular for body text and Helvetica Bold for titles, both at a minimum size of 100%. It’s simple and effective. As for buttons, they should have a corner radius of 8px. To change these settings, go to the theme settings - typography/buttons and adjust the buttons and typography accordingly. Rounded buttons create a modern, inviting feel, while full square buttons can give off an outdated vibe. Even casinos in Vegas design their buildings with curves, ensuring that visitors always have a view angle that draws them back in—it’s all about keeping things appealing and engaging. Finally, the product page layout itself should be clean and concise. Use collapsible rows for your product descriptions. No one wants to read a novel, so keep it compact and focused. Images and videos are what sell—this is why we don’t use text-heavy images in our ads; they just bore people. Keep the description short, with enough information to inform but not overwhelm. If you need to include more features, put them in the FAQs section—that’s what they’re for. The goal is to make sure that the "Add to Cart" button is visible as soon as possible once the customer lands on the product page, without overwhelming them but providing just enough information—some key benefits, high-quality images, and buying options in the bundles. Once they hit the cart, the upsells will do their job. Remember, the three essential apps for setting this up are Loox Reviews for customer feedback (use the product widget reviews at the bottom of the page before the FAQs and the rating widget just above the title), Kaching Bundles for offering package deals, and UpCart for optimizing the cart experience. Just for the record, this is to help newcomers and guide them to something taht works, me personally i don't use free themes, but this one i created could convert easily if the product, offer and ads match well. Good luck and keep testing! 🗳🥂💸🤑

Zzzz

42,318 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

$NVDA $GFS NVIDIA’s reported agreement to acquire Groq for $20B in cash (per CNBC, amplified via Reuters and other wire coverage) represents a materially different strategic posture than NVIDIA’s prior M&A pattern, given both the headline size (largest reported NVIDIA acquisition to date) and the unusual carve-out that Groq’s early-stage cloud business would not be included. Public reporting indicates the information originated from Alex Davis, CEO of Disruptive (lead investor in Groq’s latest financing), and that neither NVIDIA nor Groq had issued an immediate confirmation at the time of publication. The same reporting frames the transaction as coming together quickly, only months after Groq raised $750M at a ~$6.9B valuation, and highlights Groq’s positioning as a high-performance inference chip vendor founded by ex-Google TPU engineers. Groq is best understood as a vertically integrated inference acceleration company whose core asset is an application-specific processor optimized for deterministic, low-latency execution of transformer-style workloads, paired with a compiler-led software stack and a distribution layer (GroqCloud) designed to reduce developer friction via OpenAI-compatible APIs and integrations. Groq brands its architecture as a Language Processing Unit (LPU) and consistently emphasizes that the design target is inference, not training. The company’s own architecture description centers on 1-core execution, large on-chip SRAM used as primary storage (explicitly not cache), a custom compiler that statically schedules compute and communication, and direct chip-to-chip connectivity intended to coordinate multi-chip execution without relying on conventional caching hierarchies or dynamic runtime scheduling. The technical premise is a deliberate inversion of the conventional GPU approach. GPUs deliver throughput via massively parallel, multi-core execution with dynamic scheduling, complex memory hierarchies, and heavy reliance on off-chip HBM bandwidth and sophisticated runtime/kernel optimization. Groq instead argues that inference bottlenecks are driven by latency variance (tail latency), synchronization overhead, and memory access unpredictability inherent in dynamically scheduled, cache-heavy architectures, particularly when workloads are latency sensitive and batch sizes cannot be inflated. Groq’s solution is to move “control” into the compiler: the full execution graph and inter-chip communication schedule are computed ahead of time down to clock-cycle granularity, with deterministic execution designed to reduce run-to-run variance. In Groq’s framing, the removal of caches, reorder buffers, speculative execution overhead, and other sources of contention enables predictable latency and high utilization without per-model kernel engineering typical of GPU tuning cycles. A critical nuance is that Groq’s determinism is not merely a software claim; it is tightly coupled to architectural constraints and system design choices that trade flexibility for predictability. Third-party technical commentary indicates Groq’s chip uses a fully deterministic VLIW-style approach with minimal buffering, no external memory, and heavy dependence on sharding models across many chips because on-chip SRAM capacity is limited. SemiAnalysis describes a ~725 mm^2 die on GlobalFoundries 14nm with ~230MB of SRAM and notes that “no useful models” fit on a single chip, forcing multi-chip partitioning for modern LLMs and driving a system-level design where networking and compilation are first-class scheduling problems rather than ancillary infrastructure. This is consistent with Groq’s own messaging that tensor parallelism across chips is a primary design goal, enabled by large on-chip SRAM and compile-time coordination of compute plus interconnect. The on-chip SRAM emphasis is central to Groq’s latency story and also its most constraining trade-off. Groq claims on-chip SRAM bandwidth “upwards of 80 TB/s” and contrasts that with off-chip HBM bandwidth “about 8 TB/s,” asserting a potential 10x advantage from bandwidth plus reduced trips across chip-to-memory boundaries. While these comparisons are marketing-oriented and depend on workload specifics, the architectural implication is clear: Groq prioritizes ultra-fast local weight/activation access and then scales capacity by adding chips, not by attaching large off-chip memory pools. This design can reduce latency for sequential inference layers and minimize unpredictable stalls, but it pushes complexity into partitioning strategy, interconnect topology, and compiler scheduling, and it increases the number of chips needed for very large parameter counts and large KV-cache footprints. Groq also highlights numeric formats and compiler-driven precision management as a performance lever. In its 2025 technical blog, Groq describes “TruePoint numerics,” including 100-bit intermediate accumulation and selective quantization choices (FP32 for attention-sensitive operations, block floating point for MoE weights, FP8 storage in error-tolerant layers), and claims 2-4x speedups versus BF16 without measurable accuracy degradation on benchmarks such as MMLU and HumanEval. Even if the absolute uplift is workload dependent, the strategic point is that Groq is pursuing performance via end-to-end co-design: precision policy is not just hardware capability (FP8/BF16) but compiler-enforced mapping of precision to error sensitivity, which can matter materially for inference cost-per-token if it reduces memory traffic and boosts throughput without forcing aggressive, accuracy-damaging quantization. Independent performance datapoints indicate Groq has been credible on latency-oriented inference speed, at least for certain regimes. EE Times reported in 2023 that Groq demonstrated Llama-2 70B inference at ~240 tokens/s per user on a cloud-based dev system described as 10 racks and 64 chips, using the company’s 1st-gen silicon introduced several years earlier. Separate Groq commentary around independent benchmarking cites results showing ~241 tokens/s throughput and ~0.8s time to receive 100 output tokens for a Llama-2 70B API configuration, positioning the platform as a step-change in “available speed” for certain interactive use cases. These figures do not settle total cost-of-ownership versus GPUs or hyperscaler ASICs, but they establish that Groq’s system-level architecture can deliver strong single-user throughput and latency on large models when properly partitioned and scheduled. GroqCloud is the commercial wrapper that packages this hardware/software stack as “tokens-as-a-service,” aiming to make Groq adoption feel like switching API endpoints rather than adopting new silicon. Groq’s documentation states its API is designed to be “mostly compatible” with OpenAI client libraries, and its pricing page provides model-specific token rates, published speeds (tokens/s), prompt caching discounts, and batch processing discounts. For example, pricing lists inputs as low as $0.05 per 1M tokens and outputs as low as $0.08 per 1M tokens for certain smaller LLM configurations, with higher prices for larger models and long-context or MoE variants; it also advertises prompt caching with a 50% discount on cached input tokens for certain models and a batch API offering 50% lower cost for asynchronous processing windows. These mechanics are economically important because they demonstrate Groq’s go-to-market is not simply “sell chips,” but “sell predictable unit economics per token,” with tooling (batch, caching) that directly targets inference cost drivers (reused prompts, throughput smoothing, and asynchronous workloads). The cloud footprint and distribution partnerships indicate Groq has been building an inference-native “edge within the cloud” strategy rather than competing head-on with hyperscalers on breadth of services. A 2025 Groq newsroom release describes a European deployment in Helsinki with Equinix, positioned as latency reduction and data governance for European customers, and explicitly references Equinix Fabric enabling private connectivity to GroqCloud over public, private, or sovereign infrastructure. The same release enumerates additional capacity in the U.S. (Equinix, DataBank), Canada (Bell Canada), and Saudi Arabia (HUMAIN), and states these sites collectively served more than 20M tokens/s across Groq’s global network at that time. That supply-side metric matters because it provides a directional sense that Groq is scaling capacity as a network, not merely as a chip vendor. Customer disclosure is inherently limited because Groq is private and many enterprise deployments are not public, but Groq’s marketing materials and partnerships provide signals about demand vectors. The company’s public website displays logos of large consumer and enterprise brands (e.g., Dropbox, Vercel, Chevron, Volkswagen, Canva, Robinhood, Riot Games, Workday, Ramp) and includes a published customer quote claiming a 7.41x chat speed increase and an 89% cost reduction after moving to GroqCloud, followed by a tripling of token consumption. While marketing claims should be treated as case-specific and not generalized, they indicate that Groq is targeting both AI-native developers (who measure success by latency and cost-per-token) and enterprise buyers (who care about predictable performance and governance). Supplier and dependency mapping for Groq spans 3 layers: silicon production, system integration, and cloud infrastructure. On silicon, third-party analysis indicates GlobalFoundries 14nm for the 1st-gen Groq chip, implying a supply chain less constrained by the most capacity-tight leading-edge nodes and advanced packaging bottlenecks that dominate high-end GPU supply (HBM stacks, CoWoS-type packaging constraints). If accurate, this is strategically meaningful because it suggests Groq capacity expansion could be gated more by conventional wafer supply, board assembly, and data center power than by the same HBM/advanced packaging scarcity that has constrained top-tier GPU ramp cycles. On systems and cloud, Groq’s own releases identify colocation and connectivity partners (Equinix, DataBank, Bell Canada) and a Middle East partner (HUMAIN), implying dependencies on data center real estate, power availability, and network connectivity, alongside procurement of standard server components, NICs/switching, racks, and cooling infrastructure. The Groq design narrative also emphasizes air cooling and reduced need for complex power/cooling infrastructure, which—if realized in deployments—can widen the set of feasible hosting locations and lower deployment friction relative to liquid-cooled, very high power density GPU racks. Against that backdrop, the strategic rationale for NVIDIA acquiring Groq can be framed as a set of overlapping objectives: inference silicon optionality, architectural hedging, competitive defense, and supply chain diversification, with the carve-out of GroqCloud signaling a preference to avoid direct cloud competition and to focus on IP and product portfolio control rather than operating a capital-intensive token-serving business. The deal, if confirmed, would occur at a valuation step-up of ~190% versus Groq’s reported ~$6.9B private valuation in the September $750M round, reinforcing that any acquisition logic would be predominantly strategic rather than a conventional financial multiple arbitrage. The most compelling strategic driver is inference. Training has historically been the center of gravity for cutting-edge GPU demand, but inference volume is structurally larger and more distributed as deployments scale, with economics dominated by cost-per-token, latency guarantees, and utilization under spiky demand. Inference workloads also create a strategic vulnerability for NVIDIA: hyperscalers and large platforms can justify bespoke ASICs (TPU, Trainium/Inferentia, Maia-class efforts) because inference is stable, repeatable, and can amortize software investment at massive scale. Groq’s core proposition—deterministic, compiler-scheduled inference with predictable latency—aligns directly with the segment where GPU generality is least valued and where “good enough” programmability plus superior unit economics can win share. Acquiring Groq would allow NVIDIA to own a credible inference-native architecture rather than relying solely on GPUs and software optimization to defend that segment. Competitive defense logic is also plausible. Groq occupies a specific competitive wedge: low-latency, high-throughput interactive inference, delivered via a simple API abstraction that reduces switching cost. That wedge directly pressures GPU inference margins in the long run because it makes inference price/performance comparisons more transparent at the token level, and it targets a developer persona that historically defaulted to CUDA-first ecosystems. Even if NVIDIA’s current-generation systems can achieve very high tokens/s per user with extensive optimization, the strategic risk is that competing architectures normalize the idea that inference is best served by special-purpose silicon with a simpler programming model, weakening CUDA lock-in at the application layer. NVIDIA has actively demonstrated that Blackwell-era systems can exceed 1,000 tokens/s per user in benchmarked configurations, but that performance leadership does not automatically translate to lowest cost-per-token across the full range of batch sizes, latency targets, and deployment environments. Groq’s existence as a credible alternative architecture forces NVIDIA to keep defending inference economics rather than only raw performance leadership. The “technology acquisition” rationale is unusually strong in this specific case because Groq’s differentiator is not a single block of silicon IP but an end-to-end methodology: compiler-led static scheduling, deterministic networking, and a system architecture designed around tensor-parallel inference rather than throughput-maximizing batch inference. NVIDIA’s stack is already compiler-heavy (TensorRT, Triton, CUDA graphs, kernel fusion, speculative decoding techniques), but GPUs remain dynamically scheduled devices with complex memory hierarchies and stochastic latency behaviors under contention. Groq’s approach provides an alternate design point: treating the entire inference execution (compute plus communication) as a statically schedulable program. In principle, that IP could be valuable even if Groq silicon itself is not adopted at massive scale, because it can inform how NVIDIA builds future inference-optimized products, compilers, and networking fabrics, especially as distributed inference with large models makes communication a first-order performance determinant. Supply chain diversification is a non-obvious but potentially important driver. If Groq’s mainstream product generation is truly based on a mature process node and avoids HBM, then the scaling constraints look different than those of state-of-the-art GPUs. NVIDIA’s ability to meet incremental demand has been tightly coupled to advanced packaging and HBM supply, and those constraints can remain binding even when wafer supply is available. An inference ASIC architecture that relies primarily on on-chip SRAM and scales by adding chips—while not costless—could reduce dependence on HBM availability and advanced packaging capacity, enabling NVIDIA to ship “inference capacity” in higher absolute volumes or into geographies and customer segments where the highest-end GPUs are economically or logistically difficult to deploy. This could be particularly relevant for latency-sensitive inference deployed in regional colocation footprints rather than centralized hyperscale campuses. The carve-out of GroqCloud, if accurate, is itself a strategic signal about NVIDIA’s priorities. Operating a token-serving cloud at scale is capital intensive, structurally lower margin than silicon IP rents, and creates channel conflict with hyperscalers and CSP partners who are core NVIDIA customers. NVIDIA has generally positioned its cloud offerings through partnerships rather than as a direct hyperscale competitor. Excluding GroqCloud would preserve neutrality with CSPs and avoid inheriting multi-region data residency obligations and partner contracts, while still allowing NVIDIA to acquire Groq’s silicon, compiler technology, and engineering talent. At the same time, excluding GroqCloud would also mean NVIDIA would not automatically acquire the commercial proof-point of Groq’s unit economics or the customer contracts that validate product-market fit at scale, increasing the importance of diligence on whether Groq’s cloud pricing is structurally profitable or partially subsidized by fundraising. There is also a “preemptive acquisition” angle. The reporting identifies recent investors in Groq’s latest round including large financial institutions and strategic/industry players. In that context, Groq represents an asset that could plausibly have been acquired by a competitor (AMD/Intel) or by a hyperscaler seeking to accelerate inference independence. NVIDIA acquiring Groq could be a defensive move to prevent a credible inference-native architecture from being weaponized by a rival with deep distribution. Even if GroqCloud is carved out, controlling the silicon roadmap and compiler IP would meaningfully constrain Groq’s ability to evolve into a standalone competitor, unless the carved-out entity retains long-term rights to the hardware and software stack. However, the strategic case is not one-sided; there are meaningful risks and potential contradictions that would need to be reconciled for the transaction to be value-accretive on a multi-year horizon. 1st, Groq’s architecture appears to rely on scaling out chip count to achieve capacity, which introduces system cost, networking complexity, and physical footprint considerations. The absence of external memory and limited on-chip SRAM implies very large models require substantial chip parallelism, and the economics then depend heavily on chip cost, yield, power efficiency, and interconnect overhead. SemiAnalysis explicitly frames Groq as trading space for time and raises questions about token economics and whether publicly advertised pricing reflects fully loaded costs or market share capture. 2nd, integration risk is non-trivial. Groq’s compiler-led deterministic model is philosophically and practically different from CUDA’s dominant programming and execution model. A poorly executed integration could create internal product confusion, dilute engineering focus, or alienate developers if the combined stack fragments. 3rd, there is cannibalization risk. If Groq-class inference silicon undercuts GPU inference economics, NVIDIA could face internal margin trade-offs, even if the goal is to defend share against hyperscaler ASICs. Cannibalization can still be rational if it prevents larger share loss, but it would require crisp portfolio segmentation and go-to-market discipline. The presence of NVIDIA’s own rapidly improving inference performance complicates the “need” for Groq but does not eliminate the “option value.” NVIDIA has demonstrated benchmark-leading tokens/s per user on Blackwell-based systems, suggesting that raw interactive throughput is not necessarily the limiting factor for NVIDIA’s product line. The more enduring strategic question is unit economics and architectural control: whether future inference demand is better monetized through general-purpose GPUs plus software optimization, or whether a bifurcated product portfolio (training GPUs plus inference-native ASICs) becomes necessary to defend total AI compute wallet share as hyperscaler ASIC penetration increases. Acquiring Groq could be a decisive move to ensure NVIDIA participates in both regimes rather than betting exclusively on GPUs to win inference forever. What is “special” about Groq’s technology relative to a typical accelerator roadmap is the tight coupling of determinism, compilation, and networking into a single scheduling problem. The LPU narrative emphasizes deterministic compute and networking, static scheduling, and direct chip-to-chip coordination that allows “hundreds” (more precisely, 100s) of chips to behave like a single scheduled resource. The architecture also explicitly targets tensor-parallel, latency-optimized distribution rather than pure data-parallel throughput scaling, which matters for real-time applications where a single response must arrive quickly rather than many requests being processed in bulk. The implication is that Groq is optimized for the time-to-first-token and steady token streaming behavior that defines user experience in interactive LLMs, and it attempts to achieve that without relying on large batch sizes that can degrade latency. From a portfolio manager’s perspective, the most important interpretation is that an NVIDIA-Groq combination would likely be less about “NVIDIA needs more inference speed” and more about controlling the architectural trajectory of inference acceleration and removing a fast-improving, developer-friendly competitor from the market. The carve-out of GroqCloud would reinforce that the transaction is aimed at IP, talent, and product optionality, not acquiring a cloud revenue stream. The valuation step-up implied by $20B versus $6.9B would therefore be justified only if the acquired assets materially reduce long-term competitive risk (hyperscaler ASIC displacement, inference margin compression) or enable new monetization vectors (inference ASIC product line, supply chain de-bottlenecking, improved software determinism) that would be difficult to achieve on a comparable timeline via internal R&D.

TheValueist

102,145 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Apple’s iPad “Crush” Ad Is Bleak, Ominous and Threatening I don’t know if you’ve seen Apple’s just-released commercial for the “New” iPad Pro, but it’s pretty awful. It is dark, humorless, and feels like a not-so-thinly veiled threat to writers, musicians, game makers, developers, and artists of all kinds. …and children, even. I’ve watched it at least five times today alone, and I’m left with one big question. “Who on earth approved this?” It’s absolutely baffling that the world’s largest technology company, with the world’s biggest marketing budget, thought this would be a good idea. What kind of idiot—or idiots, since dozens or hundreds of people had to be involved in the writing, staging, producing, recording, and editing—felt this kind of ad would somehow create a positive emotional connection with consumers? Seriously, it’s terrifying. In a dank, cold warehouse, devoid of all life and humanity, an industrial crusher comes to life, and slowly starts destroying a collection of musical, philosophical, and artistic devices and instruments. For no apparent reason, everything starts getting smashed: first, a trumpet, then an arcade video game, then cans of paint, a piano, a globe, a metronome, a guitar… on and on it goes, obliterating everything in sight into a colorful, gooey, explosive mess. Books, camera lenses, lamps, a guitar, a sculpture, and a typewriter—all tools of the liberal arts—get mangled into a garbage heap as Sonny & Cher cheerfully sing, “All I ever need is you.” In the penultimate moment, a goofy yellow smiley emoji becomes a bug-eyed scary-clown freak as it, too, is crushed to death. Worse, if you enable closed captions like I do by default, the video says: “[POPPING] [SPLAT]” right as its eyeballs pop out of its head when Cher sings, “Give me a reason to build my world around you.” It’s enough to make a child cry. It has all the comforting vibes of the burnt pink teddy bear floating in the swimming pool on Breaking Bad after two planes crash in mid-air. I have so many questions (aside from simply wondering the names of the soon-to-be ex-employees who greenlit this abomination). First of all, as a trumpet player myself, I am personally offended that they made me watch a perfectly good trumpet get smashed to smithereens like it’s no big deal. Why would they torture me like this? Second of all, what is the message here? No, not that “the most powerful iPad ever is also the thinnest,” as the voiceover artist states in the last few seconds of the clip. I mean: what is the message? Ostensibly, pulverizing children’s toys, arcade games, architectural models, and ceramic Angry Birds into a paste implies something like “We’re taking all the best of humanity; all the collective works of Western Civilization, smashing it into pieces and putting it inside this remarkably thin device so you can have all of it in the palm of your hand.” But my oh my, is there an elephant in this room… he’s hiding behind the monstrous destroying machine. Did anyone inside Apple realize that everyone outside Apple will recognize this imagery in a metaphorical sense, but not the one Apple intended? We don’t see a crushing machine gently consolidating the greatest output of all our artistic endeavors, simply reformatted for a digital age and consumed by everyone with instant, fingertip access. We see what is painstakingly obvious to us, and the timing couldn’t possibly be worse. We see a giant, soulless machine consuming our work in a very different way. Right now, AI models are training themselves on our intellectual property and even our very own personally-identifying data. We aren’t the ones doing the consuming. We’re the ones being consumed. The tech industry has become one massive gaping maw, opening wide and swallowing everything in sight, chewing it up into little bits and pieces of comminuted waste, like a paper shredder or a garbage disposal. It’s destruction in its most literal form. And for what? For a newer version of the iPad that is only slightly thinner than its predecessor? For an only marginally improved version of Apple’s tablet device that has been around for 14 years? For increased profits? This is a terrible look for Apple. They may as well be saying: “All your work are belong to us.” Personally, I am a fan of artificial intelligence. I am eagerly embracing our robot overlords and I welcome our new CSV god (as the actual developers of AI models like to say). I look forward to the freedom and innovation that will come as a result of humanity augmenting our intelligence with AI like a force multiplier on a battlefield. But if Apple has the same perspective I do, they’re selling it in the worst possible way. When I see this video, I see that Apple is definitely crushing something… but I’m not sure what. -Crushing small companies that develop apps for the extremely heavy-handed App Store, which imposes byzantine restrictions on what they can and can’t do with their own apps? -Crushing competitors by limiting what they can do on the iOS and MacOS platforms with arbitrary and capricious rules about enabling functionalities that Apple doesn’t like, even if users do? -Crushing publishers and content creators with a punitive 30% fee on all subscriptions and in-app purchases? -Crushing choice and competition by not allowing app makers to make apps and programs that do the same thing that native apps already do, even if they do it better? -Crushing all human creativity and innovation by automating and systematizing everything? In the early days of the “Google vs. Apple” fight over the web and app stores, I was really concerned that Google was becoming way, way too powerful. Specifically, in 2015, when Google came up with “app streaming,” they announced a desire to form a “web of apps.” This was concerning. Especially when coupled with Google’s efforts to steal content from other websites and provide it to users via the “knowledge graph” results, ending up with the creation of “zero-click” search results pages, which absolutely punished website owners and content creators. By taking the most valuable content off a website and showing it to Google users without them needing to click through to the website itself, Google had essentially stolen everybody’s intellectual property with only the most minimal attribution possible (to fend off lawsuits no doubt, but with no intention of users actually visiting the website in question anymore). “Google is eating the internet,” I thought, and said out loud, (although I probably wasn’t the first person to use that phrase) But what I meant was purely an analogy. It was vague and ambiguous, almost silly. Maybe I was wrong, though: maybe it’s Apple that’s doing the eating. Maybe Apple is not only gobbling up everyone else’s work, but also homogenizing it—and us—and forcing us to use their platform, pay their fees, abide by their rules, and constantly keep upgrading, upgrading, upgrading, to an ever-thinner iPad in order to use it. Watch the video again. This is the stuff of nightmares. To be perfectly fair, even if I were to take the commercial at face value and ignore it’s off-the-charts creepiness and just stick to its one stated claim—that the new iPad Pro is thinner—it still fails as a commercial. Why? Because nobody cares how thin an iPad is. Seriously. I’ve owned an iPad since 2010: that means I’ve carried around a version of Apple’s already-thin tablet every day for over a dozen years. Never once have I said to myself: “You know what improvement I’d really like to see in this thing? I wish it were thinner.” Never. That thought has never crossed my mind, even once. You know what has? -Better battery life. -I’d like my iPad to not get hot to the touch when I use the Apple Pencil to take notes. -I wish it wasn’t so fragile: I dropped my brand-new iPad 2 back in the day when it slipped out of the arm-hold I was carrying it in, it bounced on the pavement, and the screen shattered into a thousand pieces, making it unusable. -I wish it had more storage. -I wish Apple would stop changing the type of cable connector it uses: I’ve gone from the original 30-pin connector to the Lightning connector, and now to the current USB-C/Thunderbolt connector. -I wish I could view the screen in direct sunlight. -I wish it wouldn’t overheat and turn off automatically when I use it outdoors in the summertime. Those are announcements I would welcome in a new iPad Pro commercial. None of this “now even thinner” nonsense nobody needs or cares about. So, back to the commercial. In my opinion, whoever made this ad should be fired. I almost never say that about other companies, especially for good-faith marketing efforts gone wrong… those of us who work in marketing make mistakes sometimes, and we learn from them. But cases like this warrant a special exception. Marketing and advertising are designed to make people want to buy your products. This commercial doesn’t just not make me want to buy Apple’s products. It makes me not want to buy Apple’s products, which is something altogether different. It turns me from someone who likes iPads into someone who is almost rethinking iPads entirely. That’s not just a bad advertisement; it’s a harmful advertisement. Apple’s usually known for great commercials. The legendary 1984 Super Bowl commercial was, of course, their best. I thought “Hello, I’m a Mac” was absolutely brilliant. They have made some missteps along the way, but this one is really bad. Not even their nauseatingly preachy and woke “Mother Nature” ad from a few years ago was this bad. Steve Jobs once said, “Technology alone is not enough—it’s technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that yields us the results that make our heart sing.” My goodness, that last line alone is poetry itself! This ad seems to be Apple signaling that they don’t believe in that anymore. And I don’t think all this handwringing is an overreaction to where you could say “Oh, c’mon, it’s just a commercial! What’s the big deal?” It is a big deal. It tells you about the values of the company, and what they intend to communicate. Really, how is this the same company that used to sell iPhones by showing grandmas using FaceTime to connect with their baby grandchildren from afar during the holidays? Everything about it is wrong: even the thumbnail they chose for it (the bulging-eyed smiley face) and the fact that they gave it the title “Crush!” It was fun to see the reactions to the video online today. I find it fascinating that Apple shared it on YouTube but turned off the comments. On X, Tim Cook shared it Tuesday, and the video, which so richly deserves to be mocked, is getting it in spades. Some people are calling it “anti-art.” One user called it “soul-crushing,” which was about as literal and logical a response as you’d expect. It turns out Apple actually made an announcement about the commercial. In response to the (apparently unexpected) poor welcome it got, Apple wrote: “We missed the mark with this video, and we’re sorry.” Lame response from a tone-deaf tech behemoth, but still, they hopefully got the message. C’mon, Apple. I have seen the future, and this ain’t it.

Ron Stauffer

19,249 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

When Elon Musk beams in virtually for a high-stakes fireside chat with JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, the conversation goes completely out of this world. The discussion was packed with massive milestones—from the bombshell that SpaceX is going public to plans for lunar AI data centers and the urgent need for the Terafab chip revolution. Here is the ultimate breakdown of their discussion: 💵 SpaceX has been self-funding and cash-flow positive for a decade Before the decision to go public, SpaceX didn't actually need to raise money to survive. The company has been cash-flow positive since around 2014–2015, meaning its private equity rounds were exclusively held to provide liquidity for employees and early investors. "We've been positive cash flow for quite a long time, I think, since around 2014-2015. And we've been self-funding. In fact, in our sort of private equity rounds, they actually have not been fundraising rounds. They've been liquidity rounds for investors and employees because we give everyone at the company stock." 🚀 The upcoming capital growth phase requires massive funding The primary trigger for going public now is an unprecedented capital expenditure phase. SpaceX is preparing to deploy an immense constellation of over 100,000 Next-Gen communication satellites and construct massive AI data centers in orbit. "we are embarking on a significant capital growth phase where we're going to put in over probably 100,000 satellites, probably over 100,000 satellites, just for communications... And then we're also doing the AI data centers in space, which is another massive capital endeavor." 📡 Starlink V3 introduces a massive bandwidth breakthrough The custom chips designed by SpaceX for the V3 satellites will completely alter global communications, offering 100 times the bandwidth of the current system and slashing latency in half by operating at a lower altitude. They are so large—the size of a small bus—that Starship is the only rocket on Earth capable of launching them, carrying 50 at a time. "The version three is, depending on how you count it, 10 to 20 times more capable than the version two satellite. And there were three chips that the SpaceX chip design team taped out that are specific to this... Which means it's 100 times more bandwidth than the SpaceX's Starlink system currently on the surface. And also half the latency because the altitude will be about half altitude." 🤖 AI and robots possess an insatiable appetite for data Musk points out that expanding infrastructure into space is vital because future AI and robotic systems will demand an astronomical amount of bandwidth compared to the relatively low data transmission rates of human beings. "And the future with AI and robots is actually going to require a lot more bandwidth than we currently use. Because you can imagine like what's the bandwidth of a human? Peak bandwidth of the human is a few hundred bits per second. But bandwidth of a computer can be a trillion bits a second. So the appetite for bandwidth of AI and robots is going to be enormous." ☀️ Space solves the looming terrestrial power plant crisis Building traditional power plants on Earth faces heavy community resistance. Moving data centers into space unlocks unlimited energy generation via solar power ("star power") without disrupting Earth's environment, tapping into an energy source that accounts for 99.8% of the solar system's mass. "It's increasingly difficult to build power plants on the ground. There are very few people who want a power plant in their backyard... But actually if we go to space, we can go far beyond the electricity generation of both. In fact, this is going to sound kind of crazy. But you could actually increase human energy by a factor of a million and still be using much less than a millionth of the sun's energy." 🌕 The Moon is a 1,000-Terawatt compute launchpad While Mars remains the long-term goal, the Moon is the immediate fast-track location for massive scaling. Because it lacks an atmosphere and has low gravity, SpaceX can use electromagnetic rail guns to shoot AI data centers into deep space from the lunar surface, scaling power to an incredible 1,000 terawatts per year. "I just think that we can build a self-sustaining city on the moon faster than we could do so on Mars. And there's also the potential... you can use an electromagnetic accelerator, a rail gun or mass driver. Basically, you don't need to use rockets to do AI data centers into deep space from the moon... We can do a thousand terawatts or more from the moon." 🪐 Mars is the ultimate "fixer-upper" planet Mars is being targeted as a full-scale terraforming project. Due to its atmosphere and gravity levels, warming up the planet could eventually unlock liquid oceans and allow humans to walk around without spacesuits. "And if you warm up Mars, you could one day make Mars like Earth. And with like liquid oceans and life. And where you could walk outside without a spacesuit type of thing. So Mars is, I call Mars a fixer upper of a planet. But it's got a lot of potential." 🚂 SpaceX is the modern-day Union Pacific Railroad Musk rejects the idea that SpaceX is moving into the hospitality or hotel business for space tourism. Instead, he views the company as a foundational infrastructure provider, comparable to the historic railroads that opened up the American West. "We're kind of like Union Pacific, you know. You know, when they built Union Pacific back in the day, people thought they were crazy. Because like, why are you trying to carry all this cargo and people to California? No one's there. But now California is the biggest state in the country." ♻️ Starship's core disruption is 100% reusability The true holy grail of Starship is full reusability, which drops orbit access costs down to the mere price of fuel. Because it utilizes ultra-cheap liquid oxygen and methane, shipping cargo to space will become more economical than flying cargo across Earth's oceans on an airplane. "The fundamental breakthrough of Starship is that it will be the first orbital rocket that is fully reusable... And the propellant we use for Starship is liquid oxygen and liquid methane, which is the cheapest propellant you could possibly get... which means that you should be able to actually send cargo to space for less than the cost of cargo on an airplane going on a trans-oceanic trip." 🔄 Starship V4 targets hourly launch cadences SpaceX's engineering pipeline is aiming for staggering operational frequencies and massive payloads. While Starship V3 targets 100 tons to orbit, the upcoming V4 variant is designed to carry over 200 tons and launch on an hourly schedule. "Because Starship V3 is aiming to do 100 tons to orbit with full reusability. And then Starship V4 we're aiming for over 200 tons per mission. And then being able to launch every hour." ☁️ Orbital data centers are entirely weather-proof Space-based AI data centers are highly practical because they are simpler to construct than communication satellites. Data is beamed via lasers between satellites, and then beamed to the ground using cloud-penetrating radio frequencies that completely bypass bad weather. "The AI data center would be much simpler by comparison. Because it's really just solar power plus radiator... The connection would happen no matter what the weather is. Because once you connect via the lasers to the Starlink communication constellation, the Starlink communication to the ground uses frequencies that are cloud penetrating." 🇺🇸 The U.S. faces a catastrophic "Zero Memory Fab" crisis A major vulnerability in domestic tech infrastructure is that the U.S. currently manufactures zero high-volume computer memory chips. Even with new facilities arriving online between 2028 and 2030, domestic supply will not match the exponential requirements of AI, which is why Musk is aggressively building the Terafab. "there's not a single high volume computer memory fab in America right now. Zero. There's one being built in Idaho by Micron. But that will not reach volume production until I believe 2028. And there's something being built in New York, but they are in, I think, 29 and 30. And this is a tiny fraction of the memory that's needed... That's why we need to do the Terafab." 🧠 SpaceX will offer proprietary AI chips and software While the orbital data center network will remain an open marketplace capable of running third-party hardware like NVIDIA GPUs, Google TPUs, or Amazon Trainium, SpaceX plans to deploy its own in-house AI chips and software stack in the near future. "So if NVIDIA GPUs can be put on it, Google TPUs can be put on it, Amazon Trainium or any other chips that you want to put on, can be put on. We'll also offer our chips in the future and I think we also want to offer our software, our AI software as well in the future." 🛡️ Starshield handles critical national intelligence Musk emphasizes his deeply pro-American stance, highlighting SpaceX's specialized Starshield division as a crucial backbone for the U.S. military and national intelligence agencies. "We have a division called Starshield which provides military communications. And you know, there's some other stuff that's kind of classified, I guess. We can't be talking about that. But we are helping the Department of War and intelligence part of the government. We're a vital element of that." 👥 Executive retention fuels the mission The core leadership bench at SpaceX is defined by extreme longevity, driven by a deep collective belief in turning science fiction into reality. Top executives like Gwynne Shotwell have remained with Musk for over two decades. "I guess Gwynne was, I think, around the seventh person to join the company. And that was 2002. It's just went to like 24 years. And generally the senior executives at the company, you have a very long tenure. I think Brent Johnson's been, you see, over 15 years... because people really believe in the mission, I think they want to stay and they want to keep building it." ❤️ Character overrides IQ in leadership Reflecting on how he has evolved over 20 years, Musk notes that he has become significantly more laid back. He has also learned that a candidate's moral character and heart are just as vital to a company's success as raw intellectual horsepower. "Well, I think I'm probably more chill than I used to be... And one of the things I've found over time... is that like in terms of like recruiting people to the company and having people work with the company, like their individual abilities and their intellectual capabilities matter a lot, but it also matters if they have a good heart. It's not just about whether somebody has a certain IQ or whatever, but just are they like a good person, that matters a lot."

Ming

60,910 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce