Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

‘𝒯𝒾𝓈 𝓉𝒽𝑒 𝓈𝑒𝒶𝓈𝑜𝓃 🎄🎶 We interrupt this regularly scheduled Virginia Tech Women's Basketball film session to spread some holiday cheer 🤗 #Hokies 🦃🥍

55,286 просмотров • 2 лет назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 1

Фото профиля cliv cranwell
cliv cranwell2 лет назад

@HokiesWBB @CoachBrooksVT @elizabethkitley I’ll give you the Christmas music. I never could learn the rules for lacrosse. Even after my daughter played?!

Похожие видео

🎄✨ A Social Mining Christmas Carol for the Global DAO Labs Family ✨🎄 This holiday season, I wanted to create something special something that reflects the joy, unity, and global energy of our Social Mining community. So I took the festive spirit of a classic Christmas carol and gave it a Social Mining twist, transforming it into a celebration of collaboration, rewards, creativity, and the unstoppable heartbeat of our Galaxy. Throughout the year, Social Miners from every corner of the world have shown up with passion, skills, knowledge, and consistency. From Claimfest to daily contributions to building culture across timelines, we’ve proven that value isn’t achieved alone — it’s created together. 🌍🔥 Today, I’m sharing a little music that captures that magic. A festive carol. A community anthem. A reminder that when we mine, we mine as one global family. I also put together a short video to bring the vibes to life and I hope this brings warmth, joy, and a smile to everyone contributing to the Social Mining Galaxy. 🎶 Listen, read, and be blessed. 🎶 Let’s close the year strong and step into the next with even more unity, creativity, and momentum. Still on the fence, come now and join the awesome community 🎄 “Mine the Chain With Joyful Energy” (Deck-the-Halls Style) 🎄 Verse 1 Mine the chain with joyful energy, Fa-la-la, the community! Global voices building synergy, Fa-la-la, it’s Web3 unity! Claimfest blessings filled our sleigh now, Fa-la-la, the rewards we plow. Raise your REP and let it shine bright, Fa-la-la, Social Miners unite! Verse 2 Share your posts and spark the network, Fa-la-la, let your effort work. Creatives, thinkers, builders — join in, Fa-la-la, earn your points again! Every like and every comment, Fa-la-la, lifts the sentiment. DAO Labs guiding all our pathways, Fa-la-la, lighting up our days! Verse 3 Borders fade when miners gather, Fa-la-la, we advance together. From the Galaxy to every timeline, Fa-la-la, watch our impact shine! Celebrate this global family, Fa-la-la, growing steadily. Christmas cheer across the chain rings, Fa-la-la — hear the Social Mining sing! #Socialmining #Christmas #carol

Godwin 🔺

11,576 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

I’ve made a short film. Look at the things around you: doors, bins, staircases, furniture, railings, doorhandles, windows. Do you like how they look, or not? Modern design has become boring, but it doesn’t have to be this way. The word “beautiful” is overused. We don’t need “beautiful” lamps, bus stops, and water fountains – we just need lamps, bus stops, and water fountains that are interesting, that actually mean something. Or, at the very least, not boring. Because the aesthetics of architecture and urban design aren’t just a bonus; they totally change how we think, feel, and behave. Boring environments make us more stressed and less productive; they erode our sense of community; they make us sadder, less trusting, and lonelier. A boring world is one where we spend even more time online and where our addictions are even harder to battle. The Problem There is global, widespread dissatisfaction with how the world looks. In this film, and the series it will lead to, we want to investigate that feeling and give it a voice. The point isn’t that we should return to the past or get rid of modernism. It’s about learning from the past in order to improve the present, and about giving the public what they very clearly want, which isn’t the eradication of modernism but the co-existence of modernism AND traditionalism. Just look where tourists go, where they take their photos, and that tells you everything you need to know about what most people find interesting or beautiful. And look at where people go on holiday. It’s always to cities filled with old architecture and design, with churches and mosques and palaces, with charming little alleyways and stone staircases and wrought-iron railings. Of the world’s fifty most visited buildings, only four were made in the 20th century, and they’re all museums or memorials. There’s a reason why posts about this go viral online all the time. Regardless of why the change happened, it is clearly the case that we no longer make things how we used to. People are rightly confused by the fact that old lamp posts (to take the example we focus on in the film) are usually so pretty, while modern ones are usually so boring. Some people say this is just an example of survivorship bias… and they’re mostly correct. But that’s the whole point! Saying old buildings are usually prettier than modern buildings is not to say that architecture used to be better, or that the past was better. It is simply to say that certain kinds of buildings, because they have been preserved, are good examples of what people like most. In which case... shouldn't we try to design at least some buildings in a way that we know people like? A Unifying Cause Everybody, from all sides of the political spectrum and all backgrounds, stands to benefit from a world that is designed more thoughtfully and imaginatively. The world could be such a colourful, meaningful, and thrilling place! So this isn’t about left versus right or conservatism versus progressivism; it’s about making our world a more interesting and meaningful place to live in. This should be a unifying cause, because everybody loses out when our homes and cities are badly designed. I want this film to unite people who think they’re on opposite sides, and to create a consensus that we need to change our approach to how we design our buildings and the objects – benches, bus stops, bins, lamp posts, aircon units – that fill our cities. The Importance of Details We are incredibly rich and have a sprawling choice of shows to stream, phones to buy, or shoes to wear… but everything feels more and more generic all the time. If you want to understand a society, don’t listen to what it says about itself – look at what it creates. You can learn everything about the Victorians – the good and the bad – just by looking at their lamp posts. And what do the ordinary details of the modern world say about us? That we are technologically advanced, very efficient… and care more about making money, about making things as quickly and cheaply as possible, than making our world an enjoyable place to actually live in. It’s important to learn about why and how things have changed, but that’s for another time. The first step is establishing that the public aren’t happy with modern architecture and design, and that something needs to be done. But what we need isn’t a total revival of so-called ‘traditionalism’; the truth is that traditionalism and modernism can (and should) co-exist. The trouble right now is that we only have one, and that people are tired of it. The Power of Noticing But this film (and the series it will, all being well, lead to) is about more than the specific argument it presents. Above all it’s about a way of seeing the world around us, a way of noticing and thinking. “How you do anything is how you do everything.” That is probably true, and it also applies to whole societies, not just individuals; a single doorbell implies everything else about the whole socio-economic and political system that gave rise to its creation. And, beyond being merely “useful”, the ability to notice details makes the world a richer place to live in, and life a richer thing to lead. This is what the film is about, more than anything: the power and joy of noticing. A Bigger Project This short film is just the beginning. We want to make a full series about the history of art and architecture, both for their own sake and also to see what we can learn about life in the twenty-first century and how to improve it. To keep updated you can join our email list over at our website, linked in the reply below. Final Words You can watch the film here on X, or over on YouTube, also linked in the reply below. So… this is where the dream begins, the dream of a new series and the dream of a more charming, more interesting, more meaningful modern world. Spread the word.

The Cultural Tutor

2,746,771 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

A group of 19 Buddhist monks completed their 2,300-mile journey to the nation's capital earlier this week as they spread messages of mindfulness, compassion and peace during their months on the road. In October, the monks and their rescue dog, Aloka, left Fort Worth, Texas, en route to Washington, D.C., for what they called “The Walk for Peace.” Along their journey, the monks from the Huong Dao Vipassana Bhavana Center greeted well-wishers with blessings, smiles and thousands of peace bracelets as they marched toward the nation’s capital. “This world has been receiving so much anger and hatred and everything already — that is why it's coming back to us with all kinds of sufferings, all kinds of disasters,” the group’s soft-spoken leader, Venerable Bhikkhu Pannakara, said at one of their final stops in Alexandria, Virginia. “We walk not to bring any attention to us, but we just hope that we raise awareness of peace to all the people who we'll meet along the road.” As their message resonated with thousands across the country and world, the group’s social media channels exploded, racking up millions of followers. Never taking a day off, some of the monks walked on foot, even in an ice storm and below freezing temperatures. Extreme weather conditions weren't the only challenge. In November, one monk had a leg amputated after he was struck by a vehicle while walking alongside U.S. Highway 90 near Dayton, Texas. And in South Carolina, Aloka, the now-famous “peace dog” began limping and required surgery. As he recovered, he largely rode alongside the monks in an escort vehicle, joining the group as they rested each evening. The monks completed their journey on Tuesday in Washington, D.C., where they pressed members of Congress to recognize Buddha’s birthday as a federal holiday. They planned to lead a public meditation before departing home to Fort Worth.

PBS News

16,715 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

👽🛸 Stratton: "It's Not from Here" and We Don't Know If It's Hostile - Plus: A PSYOP to Protect Us? And...God 🛸👽 (I'm behind on this but my posts take time, and I think many will find this interesting.) Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "Has the government been hiding the existence of UFOs from the people of this country? Here with more, the director and producer of this new documentary, Dan Farah, and the former director of the U.S. government's UAP Task Force, Jay Stratton. "Let me just tell you where I am: I am really curious about it. I've asked a lot of questions about it. I've been told...I've been given both sides in terms of the answer to the question. Some people swear it's true. Other people say, 'Nah, it's not true.' You know, like, Area 51, et cetera, et cetera." (Would be nice to know who's telling him it's true vs. not true.) Hannity: "I'm somewhat agnostic. I believe with God, all things are possible. If God created universes, within universes, within universes. Are we that arrogant to believe that there couldn't be life elsewhere that might be even more intelligent than we are? And we're not that intelligent sometimes." (I think it's interesting to see Hannity say he's agnostic about UAP/NHI, and has heard different things about about the validity of related claims - which feature a ton of anecdotal evidence, government reports, some photos, videos and radar, and current-day, high-level folks telling him they've seen classified data - but he doesn't question the existence of God? Where's the evidence for God and Jesus? Double standard. There's much more evidence for the existence of true-unknown, UFOs, than there is for God.) Hannity: "But what makes you think...why are you so certain?" Farah: "Well, look, I made this film in pursuit of the truth, to find the answers to those big questions. I interviewed 34 very-high-level government, military and intelligence officials, ranging from Marco Rubio to sitting senators to intelligence officials, admirals, generals. And collectively, they all broke their silence to reveal an 80-year cover-up of the existence of non-human intelligent life." (I really enjoyed "The Age of Disclosure" but the amount of people in it who we had never heard from before, on camera, and who "broke their silence" for this film, is just a handful of folks.) Farah: "And a high-stakes, secret Cold War race that the United States is in with adversarial nations to reverse engineer technology of non-human origin. And this has all been kept from the public, from Congress..." Hannity: "Can I interrupt you, Dan, one second?" Farah: "Yeah, yeah." Hannity: "Are you saying to me that Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed to you that not only do UFOs exist and life from some other location exists, but we are fully aware of it, and we are...there's almost a cold war going on that has never been revealed to the American people? Marco Rubio said that to you?" (That's what people may come away thinking if they just watch the film, so I'm glad Hannity asked that and Farah clarified.) Farah: "Rubio confirms on camera that UFOs, UAP, which they're now called, are in fact real. That's not a debate anymore. The only question now is: Who's controlling them? Where are they from? What is their intention? He says, on camera, that UAP are penetrating our most secure airspace, like our nuclear-weapons sites, military bases, and it's a major concern." (100% true, and it's nice to see a new, wider audience see and hear Rubio say that. But, he's been saying that, on camera, for over four years now.) Hannity: "Okay. Jay, where do you think this is coming from? Do we have any suspicion at all?" Stratton: "Well, the best way I can say, Sean, is it's not from here. You know, I spent 20 years researching this topic, working this topic directly on behalf of the American people, and I did everything I could, and did confirm that some of the things that are seen are obviously, you know, completely terrestrial, whatever word you want to use there. You know, from potential-adversary nations, from, you know, defense contractors and companies here, you know, commercial sources. However, there were still cases that we could not attribute to any nation on Earth, and that says a lot." (The follow-up should have been: "Jay, you claim some of this is, "not from here." In the movie, you say that you have seen non-human craft and beings with your own eyes. Can you explain that and share some details?) Hannity: "Do you both believe that they're hostile? Dan? Hostile forces, entities, if you will?" Farah: "I think that's to be determined." (Stratton nods his head up and down in agreement.) Hannity: "So we don't know for sure?" Stratton: "No." Farah: "We don't know what their intentions are." Hannity: "Jay?" (I REALLY wanted to hear Stratton answer the question about intent because his family, reportedly, went through a rough time with the phenomenon (Read "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon." Axelrod = Stratton) and, again, he says in the movie that he has seen non-human craft and beings with his own eyes. He helped start AAWSAP (2008-2010), created AATIP (in 2015) and was the director of the UAPTF (which began in 2020 and was replaced by AARO). Unfortunately, Farah had already started answering so we never heard about intent from Stratton. Big-time, missed opportunity.) Farah: "Look, I interviewed 34 military [and] government intelligence officials, Sean. They couldn't tell us any better than you could what the intention of non-human, intelligent life is, right?" (Stratton nods his head up and down in agreement. The question we all want to know: Do any of the people in The (alleged) UAP Legacy Program who have had access to ALL of the data have educated opinions about intent? If so, what are they?) Farah: "All we know is that this is a real situation, it exists. There are UAP penetrating our most sensitive airspace. It is a problem. And even if you can't wrap your head around the idea of it being non-human, intelligent life, what are the choices you're left with?" (Stratton nodded his head in agreement for all of that. ⬆️) Farah: "An adversarial nation like China or Russia that leapfrogged us, technologically, and is invading our most classified and protected airspace? That's not great, either. So, you know, no matter how you have to look at it to get your head wrapped around it, it's gotta become a serious conversation, a serious national conversation, a serious global conversation." (Stratton nods in agreement, again. He should have been the one doing most of the talking here because, besides the Q&A at the premiere during the SXSW festival, this is the only interview we have with Stratton since the movie came out. I'll link to the SXSW transcript in the replies.) Farah: "And, you know, the film reveals there has been a deeply-hidden, crash retrieval and reverse engineering program in the United States. China has one, Russia has one." (I would argue: Claims are made in the film but nothing is "revealed.") Farah: "There is, in fact, a high-stakes secret Cold War race. Rubio talks about this race, on camera, on the record, in the film. And makes it clear that if we don't get our act together as a nation, we're gonna wake up one day - to quote him - he literally says, 'We will wake up one day, and China will have beat us. And we won't know how they got there or when they got there, but we will be screwed.'" (Just to be clear: Nowhere does Rubio (or Rounds) say that they believe the U.S., Russia or China have a UAP crash retrieval program or that we're in a race to back engineer non-human technology. But what IS said...) Lue Elizondo: "Some of this UAP activity we are seeing here in the United States may actually be a result of a Chinese UAP reverse engineering program." Senator Rounds: "If Xi Jinping had access to this, if Putin had access to this, and they thought that we did not have access to similar capabilities than what they did, do you think for a second that they wouldn’t consider using it to achieve their ends of domination?" SoS Marco Rubio: "And if their approach to it is driven by science, and a desire to match what they think is ours, we’ll wake up one day and realize, I don’t know how they got there, but they got there ahead of us, and now we’re screwed." (To keep it simple: In other words, if China or Russia acquire advanced technology, no matter the origin, they will do everything in their power to reverse engineer it in an attempt to surpass us, technologically. Meanwhile, in the U.S., these alleged programs are hidden away with no congressional oversight and are so stove-piped that our top scientists and brightest minds, apparently, aren't able to be brought on board in an attempt to reverse engineer whatever we have in said programs. So, we've kind of handcuffed ourselves and slowed down any progress. Then again, we have have mixed messages on how much progress HAS or HAS NOT been made. Dr. Eric Davis in 2019: "The crash retrieval program is [a] very small program. It is not a massive, huge government infrastructure. It’s a very poorly-funded program and it hasn’t actually, probably hasn’t had any money for a while. I do know that the program was terminated in 1989 for lack of progress in reverse engineering, anything that they had, any of the hardware that they had. And they’ll resurrect it every, maybe so often, so many years go by and they’ll try it again. And they just don’t succeed because compartmentalization is a killer. Scientists cannot communicate with other scientists to get help." Dr. James Lacaski has said (on WEAPONIZED in 2025) progress has been made but, "it hasn't been achieved to its full extent." And Retired Naval Commander Will Miller told me in 2020: "It’s my firm belief that yes, we – the Russians, probably the Germans, and perhaps the Chinese have at least partial technologies (pieces), and most likely for the U.S. – entire operational craft. I believe we have our own trans-luminal velocity craft that can take us anywhere in space and time. Did we develop this technology independently? Probably not!" Which one is accurate? We also have Dylan Borland (2012 at Langley AFB), Daniel Gockerell (2006 at Eglin AFB), and others, saying they saw triangular (and other) craft with unique properties of flight. Did we back engineer those from UAP craft we acquired? Remember what Rounds said? "If Xi Jinping had access to this, if Putin had access to this, and they thought that we did not have access to similar capabilities than what they did, do you think for a second that they wouldn’t consider using it to achieve their ends of domination?" ~Senator Mike Rounds in AoD The PSYOP Angle: If the U.S. has not achieved any progress in reverse engineering this advanced tech (assuming we've acquired it) and China and/or Russia HAVE? And Russia and/or China suspect this? Wouldn't it make sense to pretend like we HAVE made progress? That would keep Russia and China from attacking us and achieving, "their ends of domination." So are the comments by Davis (lack of progress) accurate, and Lacatski and Miller (notable, but not full progress, and full progress) just doing their best to make China and Russia believe that we HAVE made progress, when, in reality, we have not? A PSYOP to protect our country and citizens? Or maybe we actually HAVE made progress? It's VERY confusing.)

Joe Murgia

16,247 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад