ะ—ะฐะณั€ัƒะทะบะฐ ะฒะธะดะตะพ...

ะะต ัƒะดะฐะปะพััŒ ะทะฐะณั€ัƒะทะธั‚ัŒ ะฒะธะดะตะพ

ะะฐ ะณะปะฐะฒะฝัƒัŽ

๐™”๐™ค๐™ช๐™ง ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™›๐™ž๐™™๐™š๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š ๐™œ๐™ง๐™ค๐™ฌ๐™จ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ข๐™ค๐™ข๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ž๐™จ๐™š ๐™จ๐™š๐™ฉ๐™—๐™–๐™˜๐™ ๐™จ ๐™–๐™ง๐™š ๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™– ๐™ง๐™š๐™›๐™ก๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช. With the right understanding, ๐—ณ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ ๐—ฑ๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐—ฝ๐˜€, ๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ฒ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ปs, and even tough moments ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—ป ๐—ฝ๐˜‚๐˜€๐—ต ๐˜†๐—ผ๐˜‚ ๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐˜„๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฑ rather than hold you down. In this video, Pujya Gurudevshri explains how to ๐˜ต๐˜ถ๐˜ณ๐˜ฏ ๐˜ง๐˜ข๐˜ช๐˜ญ๐˜ถ๐˜ณ๐˜ฆ ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜ต๐˜ฐ ๐˜ด๐˜ต๐˜ณ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฏ๐˜จ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ. ๐Ÿ’ช

3,217,102 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 7 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด โ€ขvia X (Twitter)

ะšะพะผะผะตะฝั‚ะฐั€ะธะธ: 0

ะะตั‚ ะดะพัั‚ัƒะฟะฝั‹ั… ะบะพะผะผะตะฝั‚ะฐั€ะธะตะฒ

ะ—ะดะตััŒ ะฟะพัะฒัั‚ัั ะบะพะผะผะตะฝั‚ะฐั€ะธะธ ะธะท ะพั€ะธะณะธะฝะฐะปัŒะฝะพะณะพ ะฟะพัั‚ะฐ

ะŸะพั…ะพะถะธะต ะฒะธะดะตะพ

Yesterday ex-Bungie exec Martin Oโ€™Donnell who successfully sued #Bungie for unpaid wages and stock ownership, did an interview with Act Man about Bungie's recent woes. He implied Bungie CEO Pete Parsons and the #Microsoft corporate ethos and management style he comes from, was to blame. Martin says; "๐™๐™๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™ž๐™ฃ ๐™ก๐™š๐™–๐™™๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™๐™ž๐™ฅ ๐™ฌ๐™๐™ค ๐™ฌ๐™š๐™ง๐™š ๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™˜๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ, ๐™˜๐™–๐™ข๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™– ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™™๐™ž๐™œ๐™ง๐™š๐™š ๐™›๐™ง๐™ค๐™ข ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ง๐™ค๐™จ๐™ค๐™›๐™ฉ. ๐™๐™๐™š๐™ฎ ๐™ฌ๐™š๐™ง๐™š ๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ค๐™ง๐™ž๐™œ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™–๐™ก ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™–๐™ข. ๐™Ž๐™ค ๐™ฌ๐™๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™„ ๐™จ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฌ๐™š ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ก๐™™๐™ฃ'๐™ฉ ๐™œ๐™š๐™ฉ ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ง๐™ค๐™จ๐™ค๐™›๐™ฉ ๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฉ ๐™ค๐™› ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ'๐™จ ๐™ฌ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™„ ๐™ข๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ." "๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ง๐™ค๐™จ๐™ค๐™›๐™ฉ ๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง ๐™ก๐™š๐™›๐™ฉ ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š." "๐™‰๐™ค, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ฎ ๐™™๐™ž๐™™๐™ฃ'๐™ฉ." "๐™„๐™ฃ ๐™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™™๐™จ๐™ž๐™œ๐™๐™ฉ ๐™„ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™  ๐™ž๐™ฉ ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™จ ๐™– ๐™๐™ช๐™œ๐™š ๐™๐™ช๐™œ๐™š ๐™ข๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ ๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™–๐™ก๐™ก๐™ค๐™ฌ ๐™š๐™จ๐™จ๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™–๐™ก๐™ก๐™ฎ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™–๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™จ๐™ค๐™ข๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™๐™–๐™™ ๐™œ๐™ค๐™ฉ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™›๐™ง๐™ค๐™ข ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ง๐™ค๐™จ๐™ค๐™›๐™ฉ, ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™–๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ช๐™–๐™ก๐™ก๐™ฎ ๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™จ๐™ž๐™™๐™š ๐™ค๐™› ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š ๐™ก๐™š๐™–๐™™๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™๐™ž๐™ฅ." Martin also believes he may have been intentionally fired just weeks before his founders stock was due to be vested, so Bungie and its leadership could save money. There were similar staff retention and shares vestment schemes as part of #Sony's acquisition of Bungie, so both would have likely saved money in a similar way with recent layoffs. Martin expands on how Pete Parsons hasn't been at Bungie for decades, and was originally a Microsoft Marketing Executive who was brought in as Studio Manager for Bungie, but left during Bungie's negotiations for independence away from Microsoft. He was not involved in any of Halo 3's production. Unbeknownst to Martin, Pete didn't actually leave the company when he left, instead went back to an executive role at Microsoft. Pete Parsons was brought back in as Marketing Head in an exec role at Bungie around 2009. Over the coming years other executives got fired while Pete eventually went on to assume the top CEO role at Bungie in 2016, just before the release of Destiny 2. Martin continues; "๐˜ผ ๐™ก๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™–๐™˜๐™ฉ ๐™ก๐™ž๐™ ๐™š ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ง๐™ค๐™จ๐™ค๐™›๐™ฉ ๐™๐™–๐™จ๐™ฃ'๐™ฉ ๐™—๐™š๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™›๐™ก๐™ช๐™š๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š ๐™ค๐™ฃ ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š ๐™›๐™ค๐™ง ๐™ค๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง ๐™– ๐™™๐™š๐™˜๐™–๐™™๐™š...๐™ž๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ ๐™š๐™จ ๐™– ๐™ก๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ข๐™š ๐™จ๐™ค๐™ข๐™š๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ข๐™š๐™จ ๐™›๐™ค๐™ง ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™จ ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™ฅ๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฉ...๐™„ ๐™ ๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ฌ ๐™๐™ค๐™ฌ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™จ๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ . ...๐™๐™๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™  ๐™–๐™—๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฉ ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ง๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™ง๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š ๐™จ๐™๐™ž๐™ฅ๐™ฅ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ค๐™› ๐™œ๐™–๐™ข๐™š๐™จ ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐™ข๐™–๐™ฃ๐™–๐™œ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™ช๐™™๐™ž๐™ค๐™จ, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ง๐™š ๐™ž๐™จ ๐™– ๐™ฅ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ง๐™ฃ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ข๐™š๐™จ ๐™›๐™ง๐™ค๐™ข ๐™– ๐™—๐™ž๐™œ ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ง๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™ง๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ ๐™ก๐™ž๐™ ๐™š ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ง๐™ค๐™จ๐™ค๐™›๐™ฉ. ๐™’๐™๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™จ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™จ๐™๐™ค๐™ช๐™ก๐™™ ๐™—๐™ก๐™–๐™ข๐™š ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š, ๐™ฌ๐™š๐™ก๐™ก ๐™„ ๐™™๐™ค ๐™—๐™ก๐™–๐™ข๐™š ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š. ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™ข๐™š ๐™ž๐™ฉ'๐™จ ๐™—๐™š๐™˜๐™–๐™ช๐™จ๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™๐™ค ๐™–๐™ง๐™š ๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ฅ ๐™ก๐™š๐™ซ๐™š๐™ก ๐™ค๐™› ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ž๐™š, ๐™ฌ๐™š๐™ง๐™š ๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ฉ ๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ฅ ๐™ก๐™š๐™ซ๐™š๐™ก ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ง๐™ค๐™จ๐™ค๐™›๐™ฉ. ๐™๐™๐™–๐™ฉ'๐™จ ๐™ฌ๐™๐™š๐™ง๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ฎ ๐™œ๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™–๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™š๐™™, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ'๐™จ ๐™ฌ๐™๐™š๐™ง๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ฎ ๐™™๐™š๐™˜๐™ž๐™™๐™š๐™™ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™๐™ก๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™๐™ก๐™š ๐™˜๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™๐™ก๐™š ๐™„๐™‹, ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ž๐™จ ๐™๐™ค๐™ฌ ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™จ๐™๐™ž๐™ฅ ๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™ช๐™›๐™›. ๐™๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ž๐™จ ๐™Ÿ๐™ช๐™จ๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ฎ ๐™™๐™ค ๐™ž๐™ฉ." Pretty damning stuff. I highly recommend watching the entire YouTube video linked below, but I've edited together some of the related excerpts in the video below. #PS5 #Xbox

NIB

102,984 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 2 ะปะตั‚ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

๐Ÿšจ Breaking... ๐™๐™ค๐™ง ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™–๐™จ๐™ ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ฌ๐™๐™ฎ ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™๐™–๐™ซ๐™š ๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™จ๐™š๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ง๐™ฎ ๐™๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™–๐™ก๐™จ. ๐™ƒ๐™š๐™ง๐™š ๐™ฎ๐™ค๐™ช ๐™œ๐™š๐™ฉ ๐™– ๐™œ๐™ก๐™ž๐™ข๐™ฅ๐™จ๐™š ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™จ๐™ค๐™ฃ ๐™ฌ๐™๐™ฎ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™ž๐™จ ๐™—๐™š๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ง๐™ค๐™ก๐™ก๐™š๐™™ ๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฉ ๐™ž๐™ฃ ๐™– ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™ค๐™ก๐™ก๐™š๐™™ ๐™ข๐™–๐™ฃ๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ง. ๐™๐™๐™š๐™ฎ ๐™–๐™ง๐™š ๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™ฎ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ง๐™ฉ ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™ฎ ๐™ช๐™ฅ๐™๐™š๐™–๐™ซ๐™–๐™ก ๐™—๐™š๐™˜๐™–๐™ช๐™จ๐™š ๐™ž๐™ฉ ๐™ฌ๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก ๐™ง๐™š๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™›๐™ค๐™ง๐™˜๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™ฌ๐™š๐™ง ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ฎ ๐™๐™–๐™ซ๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™ค๐™ง๐™ ๐™š๐™™ ๐™จ๐™ค ๐™๐™–๐™ง๐™™ ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™ค๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง๐™˜๐™ค๐™ข๐™š ๐™ž๐™ฃ ๐™ค๐™ง๐™™๐™š๐™ง ๐™›๐™ค๐™ง ๐™ช๐™จ ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™ข๐™–๐™ ๐™š ๐™ž๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™›๐™–๐™ง. ๐™‹๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก ๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ฉ ๐™—๐™š ๐™–๐™—๐™ก๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™๐™ก๐™š ๐™–๐™ก๐™ก ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™ฎ๐™ฅ๐™š ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™›๐™ค ๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š. Satanic Ritual Abuse Pedโ€ขphiliโ–ช๏ธ ๐Ÿฉธdrenchrโ€ขme Child Experiments Eโ€ขting Children Can you imagine if people found out their most beloved figures in the world participated in this? โ€ข Rapid exposure to horrifying truths could overwhelm individuals, leading to widespread anxiety, depression, and a sense of helplessness. This trauma could impact mental health on a massive scale. Especially considering billions of brainwashed people who will think the world is ending. โ€ข Such revelations could deepen existing divides within society, fostering distrust among communities. People may struggle to reconcile their beliefs about their favorite celebrities with the new information, leading to polarization. Which will play into their hatred of those they consider extremists. โ€ข A sudden upheaval of societal norms might provoke violent reactions from those who feel betrayed or threatened. This could lead to unrest, protests, or even riots, further destabilizing communities. Something the military do not have the resources to control while also trying to stop riots and the destruction of property. โ€ข If the public becomes fearful, it could be easier for certain groups to manipulate that fear to maintain control or push specific agendas, sustaining the status quo rather than dismantling it. Which will bring all of this back to square one. โ€ข Conversely, constant exposure to sensationalized news about these topics could lead to desensitization. People may become numb to the information, losing the capacity for empathy and urgency needed to address real issues. And this will no longer have the affect we fought so long for. And people will crash out. Perfect analyses by ๐ŸŽ–๏ธ Riccardo Bosi ๐ŸŽ–๏ธ The Greatest Military Intelligence Operation In History Of The World

DutchForce17

61,211 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 15 ะดะฝะตะน ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

So your entire argument boils down to this Dimitris: we should ignore a demonstrably corrupt process by the RCMP and the AG of Toronto with the advice of the new AG at the time, David Lametti, because discussing it is impolite? That is not integrity, it is willful blindness. Defending this clear cover-up, after multiple democracy watchdogs sounded the alarm on this is tantamount to denialism. When you are worried about optics, it is to side with the abusers of power over the citizens they are meant to serve, something I think Socrates in Plato's Republic would have taught you had you paid attention. โ€œ๐™๐™๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™ฎ๐™ง๐™–๐™ฃ๐™ฉ ๐™—๐™š๐™˜๐™ค๐™ข๐™š๐™จ ๐™™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™  ๐™ฌ๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™ฌ๐™š๐™ง ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐™ฅ๐™–๐™จ๐™จ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ. ๐™’๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™จ ๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š ๐™– ๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ค๐™ฉ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ง ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™š ๐™—๐™š๐™˜๐™ค๐™ข๐™š๐™จ ๐™– ๐™ฌ๐™ค๐™ก๐™›, ๐™›๐™š๐™š๐™™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ค๐™ฃ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ค๐™จ๐™š ๐™๐™š ๐™จ๐™๐™ค๐™ช๐™ก๐™™ ๐™™๐™š๐™›๐™š๐™ฃ๐™™.โ€ (๐™๐™š๐™ฅ๐™ช๐™—๐™ก๐™ž๐™˜, ๐˜ฝ๐™ค๐™ค๐™  ๐™„๐™“, ๐Ÿ“๐Ÿ•๐Ÿ๐™–) Your standard for good governance is ignominious at best. Where is the accountability for any malfeascance? Silence in the face of this is nothing less than permission for a government to believe it is above the law. You are not attacking the Pierre Poilievre Dimitris, you are attacking the foundational laws that are meant to hold politicians to account. The RCMP's chief serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister, have you forgotten this? Are you not even remotely curious as to why they didn't even interview the prime suspect of the case, the Prime Minister? Why don't you watch again what the former AG, Jody W Raybould's father had to say about what Justin Trudeau did to cover his misdeeds in the SNC-Lavalin Affair! "๐™’๐™๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™…๐™ค๐™™๐™ฎ ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™จ ๐™ ๐™ž๐™˜๐™ ๐™š๐™™ ๐™ž๐™ฃ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™š๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™—๐™ฎ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™‹๐™ง๐™ž๐™ข๐™š ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ง...๐™„ ๐™ฌ๐™ค๐™ช๐™ก๐™™๐™ฃ'๐™ฉ ๐™๐™–๐™ซ๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ ๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™ž๐™ฉ ๐™–๐™จ ๐™จ๐™ค๐™ข๐™š ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฎ ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™ ๐™š๐™š๐™ฅ ๐™ฆ๐™ช๐™ž๐™š๐™ฉ, ๐™จ๐™š๐™š๐™ข๐™จ ๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™ข๐™š ๐™ฉ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ'๐™จ ๐™ฌ๐™๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™‹๐™ง๐™ž๐™ข๐™š ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ง ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™™!" Why do you think that is Dimitris? ๐Ÿค”

Vesper

67,939 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 9 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

GREEN ARMY๐Ÿซถ Plymouth Argyle FC ๐Ÿซถ Weโ€™re at the bottom of the leagueโ€ฆIt hurts. Everyone feels down. But I know how much pressure the players are underโ€”the pressure to win, the fear of mistakes, the responsibility to their team, their families, and this club. And the hardest part? The endless criticism that follows every defeat. When I was a teenager, I was bullied every day. It drained me-physically,mentally, emotionally. There were moments when I lost hope. But no matter how tough it got, Argyle and football were always there for me. Watching Argyle fight against the odds, Seeing the supporters stand together, singing with all their hearts, no matter the scoreโ€” gave me courage. Because of Argyle, I never gave up. Because of Argyle, I kept going. That passionโ€”we must never forget it. Players, supporters, all of usโ€” we need to remember why we love football. No matter what happens, we stand by each other. We support each other. Mistakes? Everyone makes them. Instead of blaming, letโ€™s lift each other up, encourage each other. And when someone does something great, even if itโ€™s smallโ€”letโ€™s celebrate it. Letโ€™s clap. Letโ€™s high-five. Letโ€™s cheer. Play with courage, not fear. Take risks. Trust your teammates. Trust yourself. The worst thing isnโ€™t losingโ€”itโ€™s losing belief in yourself. Every single one of you has so much potential. More than you even realise. Believing in yourself, especially in tough times, is a battle. But itโ€™s a battle you must win. Push yourself. Motivate yourself. In the end, the only person who will always be with you is you. Belief spreads. When one of us believes, others will too. When one voice speaks, others listen. And together, the whole team will stand taller, fight harder, and play braver. To our players, we believe in you. Every time you wear that green jersey, you carry not just the hopes of your teammates, but the dreams of every single supporter who stands behind you.๐Ÿ’š The road ahead may be tough, but together, we can overcome any obstacle. The chance of survival isnโ€™t zero, and as long as thereโ€™s a chance, we fight.๐Ÿ’ช This club has faced adversity before, and weโ€™ve come through it stronger.๐Ÿ’š Letโ€™s dig deep, stick together, and do everything we can to stay in this league.๐Ÿ’ช We donโ€™t give up, not now, not ever.๐Ÿ’š We fight to the very last moment.๐Ÿ’š So donโ€™t look downโ€”look up. Donโ€™t look backโ€”keep moving forward. We climb this mountain together, step by step. No matter how slow, no matter how hard, what matters is that we keep going. Because we are Argyle. Argyle are absolutely formidable. I love this club. I believe in this team. Letโ€™s show the world who we are. Come on ARGYLE!, we can do this!๐Ÿ’š

้พใกใ‚ƒใ‚“๐Ÿ’šARGYLE๐Ÿ’šใƒ—ใƒชใƒžใ‚นใƒปใ‚ขใƒผใ‚ฌใ‚คใƒซ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต

20,599 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 1 ะณะพะด ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

Just in $AMD Anush "Speed is the moat"|ROCm๐ŸŽ™๏ธ In the race to define the future of AI, what's the one advantage that truly lasts? It's not proprietary tech, argues Anush Elangovan Elangovan, VP of AI Software at AMD , but the sustainable speed of innovation. He explains why AMD is rejecting the "walled garden" model for its open source ROCm stack, betting that an open community flywheel is the key to victory. Listen to understand how this open strategy is designed to out-innovate closed systems by empowering developers to solve everything from frontier-model challenges to the mundane, everyday problems that define the "last mile" of AI. AMD ROCm Software: Part 1 Transcript [00:00:00] Andrew Zigler: Joining me is Anush Elangovan, VP of AI software at AMD. And when people talk about AI compute, the conversation often stops at hardware specs, but it's more than just physical chips that win the game. It's also the software ecosystems supporting them. [00:00:18] Andrew Zigler: The prevailing strategy in the industry has been to build something like a walled garden. You know, something closed, proprietary locks, developers in. But AMD is betting on an entirely different play, open source acceleration, and with rock, their open source AI software stack. AMD is building not just hardware parity, but an innovation flywheel that's powered by the community with interoperability and the freedom to scale without all of that pesky lockin. [00:00:48] Andrew Zigler: And in this world, speed is your moat and how fast you can innovate while your platform remains open, flexible, and standardize across all of its applications. That's what we're gonna explore [00:01:00] today. So Anush, I'm really excited to have you here. Welcome to Dev Interrupted. [00:01:04] Anush Elangovan: Thanks for having me. Uh, super excited to chat about it. [00:01:07] Andrew Zigler: Amazing. Well, let's go ahead and dive right in with kind of what I laid it out with in the beginning, the idea of the moat and it being about speed. I wanna unpack that a bit because that came from you when you and I first spoke. And I, and I want to know, you know, how do you define speed inside of AMD beyond just things like hardware, benchmarks. [00:01:27] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So when we typically talk about speed, everyone's like, Hey, hardware benchmark specs, right? Like, uh, memory bandwidth or, or flops. And that is one important part of it, uh, AMD does very well. With that, we do have, a, a very good history of executing on that axis. [00:01:47] Anush Elangovan: But when I say speed is the moat, it is about, uh, how we prepare, how we build the muscle to run the race for a long time and run it fast. And it is [00:02:00] not about a single point in time that you've, you've beat some you know, benchmark and, and you declare victory. It's about building the ability to consistently develop and deliver. [00:02:13] Anush Elangovan: Both hardware and software innovation at scale and do it fast, right? Like, you know, we we're increasingly getting to a point where models come out and they're, uh, you know, a year or two ago it was like, Hey, they work on AMD on day zero, which is great, but now they are performing on AMD the day it releases, right? [00:02:32] Anush Elangovan: So, what does it take to Prefetch where the industry is going? Be prepared to intercept. At that point is what you know, I, I refer to as you know, the, the speed factor in, in creating this mode, right? And the mode is just shed all things that hold you back and run as fast as you can. [00:02:53] Anush Elangovan: Uh, because the pace of innovation that is, uh, being seen in, in AI [00:03:00] industries is just. Amazing. Right? And it's like, it's transformational at at how you generate electricity. It's transformational as at how you build data centers. It's transformational at how you deploy compute, networking. It's transformational at what kind of use cases you, you know, uh, use AI for. [00:03:17] Anush Elangovan: Uh, and for that, you need to be prepared to, see what comes tomorrow and be prepared to run the race tomorrow. [00:03:23] Andrew Zigler: Yeah, it's a really great perspective because it highlights that it's not just like a checkpoint that you run through. I like how you called out, like it's not just hitting that benchmark or being the best in class at that moment, in that snapshot, it's about having a. The throughput and about having that dedication to the idea and continuing to deliver on it. [00:03:43] Andrew Zigler: It's not just crossing the threshold, but it's also being the engine. And that's what, that's what protects a business. That is the moat, because the moat is that innovation layer, the faster and more, uh, future forward. That you can work and think, [00:04:00] you know, the better. Uh, we, we talk a lot about like future forward work styles. [00:04:04] Andrew Zigler: Like what are the things I could be doing right now today that are gonna be like, way more useful tomorrow? Let, let's abandon those, workflows that are older and that kind of like, that translates into. An advantage when you work that way. You know, what kind of things have you learned working with, uh, like across all spectrums of people who would use ROCm, right? [00:04:23] Andrew Zigler: You have like the developers, but then you also have the enterprises and you have this large span of adoptees, right? So what is the, what does that look like that you learn? [00:04:32] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, so, so the way I look at it is there are gonna be pockets of different, uh, you know, cadences, right? Like, so people who are deploying in enterprises, for example, right? The validation and how long it takes for them to deploy an LLM that's secure. It's, with guardrails, et cetera, maybe longer. [00:04:52] Anush Elangovan: but you still have to go through the process and you have to be prepared to like, walk that walk to deploy an enterprises. That doesn't mean it's [00:05:00] not fast, that's as fast as you can do for that industry, right? And if you are deploying AI in healthcare, right, it's, it's got its own, uh, cycle. [00:05:07] Anush Elangovan: but in each one of these, you want to see how, like, go down to the essence of what is it that you actually have to do. And, you know, I, I, I like how you framed it. It's like it's, you shed your prior assumptions of how things are done, right. And, and you kind of build up from a, uh, first principles, uh, approach to say, this is how I could use AI to unlock, whatever I'm doing. [00:05:33] Anush Elangovan: And, and, some of it, you know, it's good to really step back and look at. Just question every part of it, right? Like right now you're getting chat GPT and, Gemini competing for like, math, olympiads and, and, uh, college, uh, reasoning, uh, tests. Right? And, and those are like that, that is amazing and increasingly like complex tasks that they're trying to do. [00:05:58] Anush Elangovan: But there may also be like. [00:06:00] More mundane things that AI could, could get applied to. Right? And, and so when we think about shedding old ways, you wanna shed it not just in like the tip of the spear. It's like, you know, I'm gonna see what's the frontier model. It's also, it could be something as simple as. [00:06:18] Anush Elangovan: How do you choose a, a movie, uh, you know, like a recommendation system, right? Or, or, uh, an automated, uh, flight, uh, rebooking system. So the moment, you know, your flight is late, uh, right now it's a notification, right? It's like, oh, you got a text message saying your flight's late. And I got that like three times this week. [00:06:38] Anush Elangovan: But anyway, uh, and, and, and, and, I was just like, okay, so if I were to rethink this. All this MCPs that we have that should be hooked up into an MCP that says, your flight's delayed. Here are your options. If you want, you know, these are the paid options. Yeah. Here are the free options. This will get you back into your you know, Toronto airport [00:07:00] tonight. [00:07:00] Anush Elangovan: Or if you stay, here's a hotel plus this, plus this, plus. It's just like, go ahead is all I should say. Versus now I'm like, okay, can someone, you know, can I call a travel agent? Can I do this? Can I go online and log into And you know, so we gotta fundamentally rethink even those like small, nuances of, things that we do that can be automated out and AI is really, really good at doing something like this, right? Maybe I just explained an AI startup idea right now. Somebody should just start that. [00:07:29] Andrew Zigler: I think you did. Yeah, you definitely did. Someone, one of our listeners is definitely going to lift that off of you. I, I, I, you know, I hate being on the receiving end of those. You feel a little helpless and then you have to like, follow the whole flow. So I know what you mean. Like I, I like how you called out that the build and this like. [00:07:45] Andrew Zigler: Where speed is your moat and the innovation layer is protecting you, is what makes you better than your competitors. How you scale that and you bring that to market. So by understanding the problems that you're solving, uh, throwing away those older assumptions, but also [00:08:00] recognizing that like. We're building every single day, new things and new ways of using stuff that we're still figuring out the implications of. [00:08:08] Andrew Zigler: And so when you have a lot of velocity and you're introducing a lot of new ideas, and maybe you have that workflow now that automatically rebook your flight off of your late flight text message, and uh, I know I would certainly use it, but you know, what kind of philosophies guide the way that y'all think about building this ecosystem to manage that stability while letting folks. [00:08:29] Andrew Zigler: Play with the speed and the assumptions and the airplane re bookings. [00:08:34] Anush Elangovan: so, so I think, you know, we need to peel one layer down, right? and the philosophy is, Hey, we, we just discovered electricity, right? And you know what we're gonna do? We are gonna make motors, uh, or dynamos, right? Like engines. Uh, sure. We don't know if it's gonna be a Ferrari that you're gonna make, or it's a a a a dump truck. [00:08:57] Anush Elangovan: That's good for doing this. But let's [00:09:00] let, which is also required, right? You need a dump truck. You need a garbage truck. And, [00:09:04] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. You need the [00:09:04] Anush Elangovan: course you need, uh, a Ferrari for a midlife crisis, right? So, [00:09:09] Andrew Zigler: precisely. [00:09:10] Anush Elangovan: But, but my, uh, point is what do we build next? And, uh, and this is what I meant by like, okay, let's, let's take those baby steps to build the. [00:09:20] Anush Elangovan: Infrastructure that's required that we know we'll have to use, right? So, so if I just discovered electricity, okay, great. Now one, how do I save this electricity and how do I use it? So there's battery technology, so you need to do something like that, right? Like so. But then you also want to make it into an actionable thing. [00:09:37] Anush Elangovan: You want to make it for like automobiles, or you wanna use it for, you know, powering, uh, entire cities. So it is that transformational. So, uh, AI is that transformational. So, if you distill down, it'll, it'll come down to how do we think about, what we can do with this this fundamental technology that, We may not be aware of what it [00:10:00] is gonna unlock next, but at least you know the next step is clear, right? It's like a dense fog, you know, it's gonna be like, it, it's the right path. You see the light, but it's kind of like out there and, and the steps you're taking are concrete and you're like, okay, this is good. [00:10:16] Anush Elangovan: I, this is better than where I was or where we were. So we are moving forward. So you can build with the. Intuition from what you see in the short term and a tactical view, but towards what you think the future is gonna be. [00:10:28] Andrew Zigler: Right. You almost like we're all in this like fog of war, right? And like you said, you're reaching out and you're trying to step through it. You could think of it too, as like you're in the dark and your hands are up in front of you and you know that. You're, you're not gonna run your face into a wall because your hands are out in front of you, but you're not gonna maybe do much better than that. [00:10:45] Andrew Zigler: So that's kind of like, I think the eco, the, the industry, the world that we find ourselves in, uh, and we all have to, then this becomes the power of an ecosystem, of a group of people working together to create that layer of, [00:11:00] uh, of establishing the [00:11:01] Anush Elangovan: exactly. And I, I, I just, instead of, you know, saying fog of war I describe it as like, you're in this. Beautiful valley with like a morning, uh, fog that's in. You can smell the flowers. You, you hear the birds. You are like, okay, it's, we are in like, uh, utopian paradise and yes, I just need to like, continue the walk, right? [00:11:24] Anush Elangovan: and then move forward with that, conviction that you're in the right spot. [00:11:27] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. So let's talk about that ecosystem world. This nice, I love how you describe it, this grassy side of a hill in the morning that's covered in some mist and maybe we can't see 30 feet in one direction, but it sure is a beautiful hill and it smells nice. And so we're all here. And why is, in that world, why is. [00:11:44] Andrew Zigler: You know, open source, their strategic advantage that y'all are going for in the AI hardware market. And, and then how does like ROCm turn that into wins for people within that ecosystem? [00:11:56] Anush Elangovan: you know, the, the way we look at it is this, is kind of like how I view [00:12:00] AI and the ecosystem, right? But, but it is for everyone to enjoy. Uh, and so we do want to make sure that. You know, it is, uh, beneficial for everyone. [00:12:09] Anush Elangovan: The ecosystem can come in and, and innovate. It's an open innovation engine. and uh, it is very different from, you know, having a walled garden with, Hey, only I know how to do this and I'm gonna do it and throw it over the fence and you can use it or keep walking, right? So we'd like to be good citizens that way, but also. [00:12:30] Anush Elangovan: Uh, it is self-fulfilling in a way, right? Like it, the, the pace at which we innovate with open source is unmatched. Like, you know, our serving engines are like VLLM and, and sg l. Those things, uh, those frameworks are like super, super aggressive in terms of how fast they come out with features and how fast they can you know, get performant models out. [00:12:52] Anush Elangovan: And that compared with what, uh, you'd get from, you know, the likes of like T-R-T-L-L-M or something is always lagging, right? Because you [00:13:00] just can't keep up with you know, 200 commits a week just on one particular model to get that model really performant [00:13:06] Andrew Zigler: And, and, and in that world where, you know, everyone can enjoy the winds of this, what kind of customer stories or innovation stories have really stood out to you and excite you about building and creating this place for developers? [00:13:19] Anush Elangovan: Yeah. So I think the parts that are super exciting for me are when when we get to see a customer that is first skeptical. Then they start a little like, okay, fine, we'll give you a chance. Uh, we do a simple, uh, POC and then they're like, huh, this seems to work. Yeah, we told you it works. [00:13:42] Anush Elangovan: You don't have to change one line of code. Really? Yes, no need to change one line of code. Okay, let's try a production workload. So then they try it. Oh, you're more performant than the competition. Yes. We're more performant than, than the competition. So how much does it cost? And we're like, oh, it's your TCO is better with, uh, [00:14:00] AMD. [00:14:00] Anush Elangovan: So again, they're like, wow, okay, good. So now how do we deploy at scale? And then we go deploy it at scale. And when they give a thumbs up on that and they say, this is good, right? That's when you know, you, you see it go full circle from like, oh, we, we've never heard about AMD to like actually deploy to tens of thousands of GPUs In the order of a few months, right? It, it, it really is fascinating to see and very exciting and invigorating to [00:14:28] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. At like a great exposure to a lot of interesting problems. And, and then people using the infrastructure, the, the technology available to solve those problems. Really specific problems by the way, that's often why they're bringing their data and AI to it, uh, is because it is really specific and important for them. [00:14:45] Andrew Zigler: And there's a, a lot I think that other engineering orgs can learn and even emulate from AMD's success and, and having this open source ecosystem and it causing this acceleration within. You [00:15:00] know, uh, customers and enterprises that use and adopt the tools and, and, and that creates an advantage. And that goes back to why we're talking and like the real thesis of our conversation today. [00:15:10] Andrew Zigler: So how do you think engineering leaders that are listening to this and obviously tapping into this great success AMD has from an open source flywheel, how do you think other, other folks building in the same space can foster that open, first, that open source oriented culture in order to, you know, accelerate their innovation goals? [00:15:29] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So the startup that um, was acquired by AMD we, we built, I mean, we started off doing iot stuff and you know, smart ring and all that, right? But in the, the end of like, uh, and not the end, the last six years of the company was building ML compilers. [00:15:47] Anush Elangovan: And ml, ML compilers are like super, uh, complicated, sophisticated, advanced algorithms, dah, dah, dah. but it was all open source, right? So our VCs were like, wait, what do you mean your core [00:16:00] IP is open source? And um, the speed is the moat applied even then, right? It was just like, yes, if you have an idea that. [00:16:08] Anush Elangovan: Because someone saw this idea that you are, they're gonna be able to catch up, then you probably have the wrong idea anyway. But if they are, you know, you execute and they're gonna catch up, that you should assume they're gonna catch up. Right? So you gotta move forward. So keeping it open source is super important. [00:16:25] Anush Elangovan: But also to your question on like, you know, the learnings from an AMD standpoint, right? If there are, hard problems, I'd say dig in and work through it, right? Like there's no way but through it, right? That should be the simple mentality. And more, uh, frequently than not. you'll see that you'll just make it through in a, in, in good form. [00:16:52] Anush Elangovan: But if you doubt it and you're like, oh, I don't know if I should commit, if I'm, I, you know, what should just commit to do the right thing [00:17:00] every step, right? Every step, and just keep taking one step in front of the other. And in no time you'll see that you'll be running. Right. And, and yes, the first few steps will be like, yeah, everyone's complaining about your software quality. [00:17:15] Anush Elangovan: Everyone's complaining about this and that, and it doesn't work. And, and a few steps in, you know, you get, you get the hang of all the complaints that are coming in. You get the feedback loop. You're like, okay, what, what are you prioritizing again? One step in front of the other, right? You just keep knocking that out and then you get to a point where you're, it just becomes second nature, right? To do the, to do the right thing. And, and then yes, if someone gives you two options, you'll be like, fine. This is, uh, you know, there's always the resource trade off. There's always a human capital trade off, but what's the right thing to do? of course, I, I'm pragmatic about what we choose, but, but if the right thing for your long-term success is dig in, go first, principles, make it [00:18:00] happen. [00:18:00] Anush Elangovan: Well. Then just go for that. There's, there is no shortcut to [00:18:04] Andrew Zigler: acknowledging, you know, how it aligns with your mission, your core company goals, and what you're looking to achieve. And, and I, I love how you rightfully called out that in the open source world and you know, you have your technology that you've built, what you think is your moat upon, right? [00:18:22] Andrew Zigler: It's your code and, and to open source that, or to just make it where anyone could peer in is, you know. Scary in one regard, but two, it just kind of feels like you're handing away your throne room in some kind of sense, a very direct feeling sense. But the ultimately, you were really right to call out, and this is something I think about all the time, that the real power there is still the speed This the speed. [00:18:42] Andrew Zigler: That was the moat at the beginning of our conversation. It's the speed in combination with your. Very specific domain understanding of what you're building and what you're creating, and your new role as the steward of that world and how people plug into it, which [00:19:00] has frankly, a lot more influence and power than lording over a closed. [00:19:04] Andrew Zigler: You know, repository or an ecosystem, and like you said, like throwing things over the wall. Sure. There, there might be people always on the other side of that wall, but you're not gonna have a great connection with them. You're not gonna be able to really clearly understand them. I, I like your metaphor of the side of the field of the mountain a lot more. [00:19:23] Andrew Zigler: But, but in the, in this world, you know, where. That speed is, is the power and, and open source is just one way that you can harness that speed to get really far ahead and to innovate. , There's other parts of this equation that you can be experimenting with too, and I'd love to pick your brain about them as a software leader and, and, and one of them is about looking forward and kind of understanding that future that we're all building towards and beyond today's models and hardware. [00:19:48] Andrew Zigler: You know, what do you see as the next major bottleneck or opportunity in the AI compute space? As, as you know, enterprises and folks start to get a little more mature about what's available to [00:20:00] them. [00:20:00] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, I think, the bottleneck and opportunity is, uh, what I'd call, call walking the last mile of ai. Right. Uh, and like I I, I gave you an example, uh, previously, but, but it's similar to that. It's like there are cases where Humans have so many, uh, things to do in your day. You know, like the, if we sit down and actually had a customer focus like, okay, these customers lives, I'm gonna save four hours of this customer's life. And if you actually sit down and look at all of that, it'll be. Easily automatable, easily you know, uh, applicable, uh, for ai, right? [00:20:39] Anush Elangovan: Like, but then making it happen is gonna take a little bit, right? It's like maybe it's, uh, paying your utility bill, right? Or something like that, right? Or, or, your healthcare explanation of benefits. Uh, like, I'm sure you get an explanation of benefits, and I'm like, I, I don't even know what that thing is. [00:20:55] Anush Elangovan: It's just like EOB and like. [00:20:57] Andrew Zigler: it's a big, a big old PDF. Yeah, [00:21:00] exactly. [00:21:01] Anush Elangovan: Like, like, I'm like great straight to the, uh, shredder, right? And but that could be, you know, automated with the ai, right? It, it, it'd be like, Hey, the summary of this thing is you went and visited this day. Everything is okay. Everything is paid for, so don't worry, it's not a bill. [00:21:17] Anush Elangovan: That again, the same, uh, thing, but the sense of what that information overload is could be. Digested by ai, uh, accumulated over time and retrieved when you need it. Like, I don't, I actually don't even need to know this EOB right now, unless of course, whenever I need to know it, that maybe, you know, like for some benefits I need to figure out what do, what did I do over the past year and how do I apply it? Source:

Mike

14,195 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 8 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

๐ŸŽ™๏ธIntroducing Max Agency Max Agency is a new podcast where we go deep on how the best agents are actually being built: architecture decisions, tradeoffs, evals, and everything in between. Each episode, I sit down with engineering leaders who are doing this work in production. Our first episode features Izzy Miller (Izzy), AI Engineer at Hex (Hex). Hex has been shipping data agents since before most teams were even thinking about them, starting with single-cell text-to-SQL and graduating to a full Notebook agent that can work autonomously for 20 minutes on a complex analysis. Izzy has a lot of perspective on what it actually takes to get agents working well in production, and what breaks along the way. A few takeaways from our conversation: - Keep your eval sets small enough to hold in your head: Izzy runs 30-50 handcrafted "traps" with multiple repetitions, rather than hundreds of variants. If you can't explain why your agent fails each one, your eval set is too big - Day zero performance is almost irrelevant: The more interesting question is how the agent compounds. Izzy is building a 90-day simulation where the warehouse evolves and the agent has to accumulate understanding - You can catch agent errors without seeing the raw outputs: By running an LLM-as-a-judge over production usage and clustering the results, you can surface places where something likely went wrong, without needing to read individual conversations Watch the full episode on: - Youtube: - Apple Podcasts: - Spotify:

Harrison Chase

33,582 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 4 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

Jordan Peterson: "If you can't fix your room, you can't fix your life" "Why should you even bother improving yourself? The answer is something like: so you don't suffer anymore stupidly than you have to. And maybe so others don't have to either. It's not some casual self-help doctrine. If you don't organize yourself properly, you'll pay for it. In a big way. And so will the people around you." Peterson continues: "You can say, 'Well, I don't care about that.' But that's actually not true, you do care about it. Because if you're in pain, you will care about it. It's very rare that you can find someone in excruciating pain who would say, 'Well, it would be no better if I was out of this.' Pain brings the idea that it would be better if it didn't exist along with it. It's incontrovertible." On how to start: "Look around for something that bothers you and see if you can fix it. You can do this in a room. Sit in your bedroom and think: 'If I wanted to spend ten minutes making this room better, what would I have to do?' You have to ask yourself that, it's a genuine question. And things will pop out. There's a stack of papers bugging you. Some rubbish behind your computer monitor you haven't attended to for six months. Cables tangled up." He explains why this matters: "If you were coming to see me for psychotherapy, the easiest thing would be to get you to organize your room. You think, is that psychotherapy? It depends on how you conceive the limits of your being. Start where you can start. If something announces itself as in need of repair that you could repair, fix it. Fix a hundred things like that, your life will be a lot different." On fixing what you repeat every day: "People tend to think of their daily routines as trivial. You get up, brush your teeth, have breakfast. Those probably constitute 50% of your life. People think, they're mundane, I don't need to pay attention to them. No, that's exactly wrong. The things you do every day are the most important things you do. Hands down. Just do the arithmetic." On staying within your competence: "Sometimes you don't know how to fix something. Imagine you're walking down the street and there's a guy who's alcoholic and schizophrenic and has been homeless for ten years. That's a problem. It would be good if you could fix it, but you haven't got a clue. You walk around that and go find something you could fix. Just because something announces itself as in need of repair doesn't mean it's you, right then and there, who should repair it. You have to have some humility. You don't walk up to a helicopter that isn't working and just start tinkering away." Peterson shares the key insight: "As soon as you give your mind a genuine aim, it'll reconfigure the world in keeping with that aim. That's actually how you see to begin with. You've all seen the video where you watch basketballs being tossed back and forth, and while you're doing that, a gorilla walks into the middle of the video and you don't see it. If you thought about that experiment for five years, that would be about the right amount of time to spend thinking about it." He explains what it reveals: "What it shows you is that you see what you aim at. If you can get one thing through your head, that would be a good one. You see what you aim at. One inference you might draw from that is: be careful what you aim at. What you aim at determines the way the world manifests itself to you. So if the world is manifesting itself in a very negative way, one thing to ask is: are you aiming at the right thing?"

Jaynit

68,799 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 3 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

Paris Hilton shares video of destruction after Malibu home burns down: โ€œI'm standing here in what used to be our home, and the heartbreak is truly indescribable. When I first saw the news, I was in complete shockโ€”I couldn't process it. But now, standing here and seeing it with my own eyes, it feels like my heart has shattered into a million pieces. This house wasn't just a place to liveโ€” It was where we dreamed, laughed, and created the most beautiful memories as a family. It was where Phoenix's little hands made art that I'll cherish forever, where love and life filled every corner. To see it reduced to ashes... it's devastating beyond words. What breaks my heart even more is knowing that this isn't just my story. So many people have lost everything. It's not just walls and roofsโ€”it's the memories that made those houses homes. It's the photos, the keepsakes, the irreplaceable pieces of our lives. And yet, in this pain, I know I'm incredibly lucky. My loved ones, my babies, and my pets are safe. That's the most important thing, and I'm holding onto that gratitude with everything I have. And beyond grateful to all the the fire fighters, first responders and volunteers risking their lives. To everyone who has sent love, prayers, and kindnessโ€”you've reminded me that even in the ashes, there is still beauty in this world. do Thank you from the deepest part of my heart. And to everyone going through this same pain, please know you're not alone. We're in this together. We will rebuild, we will heal, and we will rise stronger than before. Let this be a reminder to hold your loved ones close. Cherish the moments. Life can change in an instant, and it's the love we share that truly matters. I'm sending all my love to everyone who is hurting right now.โ€

Pop Crave

181,430 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 1 ะณะพะด ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

I see that this video has made rounds on this platform. These days, one has to clarify everything because most of us see everything to the lenses of our bias. Few things to note. 1.For the records, I have been an avid Peter Obi supporter. I posted a picture of us on this platform. Ironically, just about a month ago, I praised him for his culture of modesty, and how Christians should emulate that. 2.There are indeed Christians who rather than working towards a great nation are โ€˜onlyโ€™ praying that the nation โ€œmoves forwardโ€. No amount of prayer will be substitute for productive labour, and electing the right people to lead the nation. What then is my issue with the statement? insinuate that instead of vigils we should have night shifts is a fallacy of false dilemma. Even in more developed countries, most people donโ€™t work night shifts. Church Vigils are not the reason people donโ€™t work night shifts. If you want more morning, afternoon or night shifts, hold the government accountable! Even then, let people do what they want to do with their personal time 2.Almost no Church holds vigils โ€œMondays to Fridays and both morning and nightโ€. I know this will still fly over some heads so let me break it down; โƒThrice a week may be a lot but it is not everyday. โƒHaving 20 days of vigil is still not everyday. โƒAlso, most multiple meetings in Churches are had by different subgroups of people in Church and not everyone. So why say โ€œMondays to Fridayโ€? Itโ€™s called a โ€œstraw manโ€ argument- to present the worst possible scenario so you can win an argument. I said, if the average Christian does not go to Church more than twice (or at most thrice) a week, the generalization reflects a bias. Going to the gym that many times is not too much. Socializing that many times a week is not too much. But going to Church is hurting the productivity of the nation? That is simply dishonest. If you arenโ€™t a believer and you see no point in spiritual exercise, I understand. But even then, people should have the right to do what they want with their personal time. 4.The Church has helped the nations productivity in a tangible way. There are a lot of soft skills that are developed in Church. Music, photography, videography to mention a few. Even most of the secular artistes horned their gift in Church. This is not to discredit the person of Mr Peter Obi. I just beg to differ, which I very well have the right to as a stakeholder. I remain a supporter of his ideologies. Regards.

Apostle Emmanuel Iren

2,836,099 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 1 ะณะพะด ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

It's not about what we have or don't have that drives our trading decisionsโ€”it's what we're afraid of losing. This fear of loss has often led me down the false path of perfectionism. Yet true mastery and profitability in trading, like in art, comes from embracing the craft's imperfections. โœ‰๏ธ At the recent Mumbai traders' meetup, Chhirag Kedia spoke a line that has resonated with me all weekโ€” เคตเฅ‹ เค†เคฆเคฎเฅ€ เคธเคซเคฒ เคนเฅ‹เคจเฅ‡ เคธเฅ‡ เค•เฅ‹เคˆ เคฐเฅ‹เค• เคจเคนเฅ€เค‚ เคธเค•เคคเคพ เคœเฅ‹ เค…เคชเคจเฅ€ เค•เคถเฅเคคเฅ€ เคœเคฒเคพ เค•เคฐ เค†เคฏเคพ เคนเฅ‹! It made me reflect on my trading journey and how my risk-taking appetite has evolved over the years. I'm inherently risk-conservative as an individual, though my career decisions and trajectory paint a completely opposite picture. I've never gone bust or even had a significant drawdown in my trading lifeโ€”initially because I was too cautious, and now because my skills have improved. When I look back at my interactions with other traders and analyse my own performance graph, I am noticing a pattern: traders who started recklessly or faced major drawdownsโ€”but persistently improved their executionโ€”often developed better and faster learning curves than those who began cautiously with small positions. Even Quallamaggie (Q) and Zanger (Z) demonstrated similar patternsโ€”their initial failures didn't reduce their risk appetite or aggression. Rather, they increased their risk appetite as their accounts grew larger. When ordinary traders dismiss Q and Z as exceptions in the trading world, they're likely rationalizing their own fearsโ€”fear of bouncing back from setbacks beyond their risk comfort zone, and fear of not having enough skin in the game. After all, as Taleb says, courage is the only virtue you cannot fake. I wonder if I would have been a better trader today had I started more aggressivelyโ€”even borderline recklesslyโ€”and then learned to control that aggression, rather than the other way around. Has my obsession with perfection (or trying to get close to it) actually slowed down my learning curve as a trader? Perfectionism and Self-Abuse In every tradeโ€”even with flawless setups and meticulously calculated risksโ€”there are countless ways to feel wrong, whether you make money or not: You buy and it goes down You don't buy and it goes up You buy, it falls, you sellโ€”then it goes up It goes up, you sell, and it keeps going up It goes up, you buy, it goes up furtherโ€”then drops You buy with half size and it moves up; you pyramid with full size and it goes down You buy with double size and it drops; you buy with half size and it doesn't go up as much . . . and the list can go on But there is only one way you'll feel right: When you buy and it immediately goes up, and when you sell and it immediately goes down. And this is a very very rare instance. But the pursuit of perfect tradeโ€”trying to capture both the first and last eighth of every tradeโ€”is where much self-belief and confidence is needlessly lost. The search for the perfect chart, perfect market conditions, and perfect mindset was probably the most paralyzing form of self-abuse in trading I had done. It led me to the comfort of inaction rather than risk the ego to scrape the imperfect rewards on offer. Lets take up an example that was discussed in the last Mumbai meetup - PDMJE Paper - Trade Objective An Episodic Pivot setup, gapping out of a big base, to be held as a longer positional play. Entry (Orange lines) 29th October 2024 Entry 113.95, Stop Loss 2% - 111.7 (~Day low) Risk on Trade 0.75% of portfolio, Size - 35% Sells (Blue Lines) 50% Sell at 6R - 128.6 - This was not a planned sell, but I observed weak market depth with sporadic volumes over the next 3-4 days. As a precaution, I reduced size in this illiquid counter. = 3R 50% sell at ~12R - 143 - The swing move had become overextended, moving far from the 10/21 EMA. The position was sold when price broke below the opening range lows in weakness. = 6R Impact of portfolio - 6.75% Analyzing this trade up to this point, it was executed well with little room for improvementโ€”almost perfect. This was also a very obvious EP trade, and many others had executed it similarly. In the group discussion of this trade, even though everyone had profited, regret about the price movements after exit overshadowed the satisfaction from actual gains. If you had missed the pullback entries near the 21 EMA on November 13th (which wasn't actually setup-ready) or the breakout entry that triggered on November 29th (when markets were strong and many stocks were breaking out), you would have likely missed the 80% move that happened in less than a month, which I did. The traders in the group spent much of their emotional energy obsessing over this missed opportunity, ultimately accumulating emotional debt from the markets. The paradox of trading is that while realized losses may dent our account, missing potential gains often dent our confidence. Each time we let the fear of missed opportunities overshadow our actual successes, we unconsciously train ourselves to trade smaller, not bigger - precisely when our proven profitability should be empowering us to scale up. It took me years to understand that successful trading doesn't require feeling happy. I can make sound decisions and evaluate my performance objectively, even when I feel frustrated about missed opportunities. The only true nobility in this business is making money, not chasing dopamine highs. The Adjustment Taking a loss is straightforwardโ€”we simply follow our stop loss. The real challengeโ€”and greatest potential for regretโ€”lies in managing profitable positions, particularly when a stock has made big moves in a short period. This is particularly common in magnitude trades like an EP or IPO where our objective is to hold for a longer duration and sell into weakness, but often have moments when the stock is overextended in the short term with a high probability of pulling back. However, we hesitate to sell either because it conflicts with our original trade objective or because we fear missing the chance to buy back during the pullback. This is where many professional traders actively manage their core positions. Rather than passively waiting for a deeper trailing stop loss to trigger during weakness, they sell a portion when the price becomes extended and buy back the same amount at a lower price. This strategy proves more effective than enduring drawdowns while waiting for a formal pullback setup at support levels or moving averages. Let's take a recent example of IGIL (5 min chart) - Trade Objective An early-stage IPO setup displaying a typical volatility contraction pattern (VCP) on intraday charts. The plan is to hold this as a longer-term position, treating it as an All-or-Nothing trade. Entry (Orange line) 24th December 2024 Entry 504, Stop Loss 2% - 493.95 Risk on Trade 0.50% of portfolio, Size - 23% of pf Adjustment Context - 27th December 2024 The stock had surged powerfully over the previous two days, hitting Upper Circuits. On the third day, despite gapping up at open, it immediately broke down during the opening range - like a typical parabolic short setup. This was a point with a high probability of a short-term pullback or consolidation. Sells (Blue Line) 27th December - 585 - 50% size Buyback (Orange line 2) 27th December - 565 - 50% size - Gained 1R Rationale - My anchor bias was for the price to cool off for a bit. - At the 27th open, the price was already at ~8R+ for me. Even if the stock rose further after I sold my partial position, I wouldn't regret it muchโ€”I had already secured 4R with half my position still pending, well above my journal averages. This served as an important emotional anchor point for this adjustment. - When buying back, I was simply looking to average down my costs without a specific target or a perfect setup in mind. In this case, I bought back at 565, as the buyback itself presented a good psychological point to cover (10 Rs initial stop loss, 20 Rs points averaged ~1R at half size). It could have been lower too if the breakdown was slower. This was more intuitive and intentionally imperfect. - I close most of these adjustments on the same day since they are just short-term pullbacks and my overall bias remains bullish. A magnitude trade can also be looked at as a combination of several intraday trades around a core position. - This adjustment method applies specifically to magnitude trades like EP and IPO positions, where the trade objective aligns with pyramiding or averaging costs. Caveat You might think this is a cherry-picked exampleโ€”and you'd be partly right, since it's one of my better and more recent trades (you can see similar patterns in Care or TI). However, I urge you to stay open to the concept. Look back at your previous trades where you held positions too long passivelyโ€”you'll often find that temporary extensions and pullbacks were easily visible, offering opportunities to capture additional Rโ€™s along the way. Traders commonly face similar emotions and dilemmas when deciding how to act in these situations. End Note

Anuragg Venkatakrishnan

24,423 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 1 ะณะพะด ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

At some point, you and your pro-Democrat Black friends need to come to the realization that there was NOTHING stopping Trump in this election. Biden was NEVER beating Trump. And that's because the Democrat Party completely betrayed EVERY SINGLE value they once had, which anyone who ISN'T an MSNBC junkie understands. This is what explains the MASSIVE shift in sentiments among BLACK and Hispanic voters NATIONWIDE, along with the rest of the country. The main reason why many people voted for Biden in 2020 (speaking for myself and several voters I've spoken to PERSONALLY), was because HE vowed to be a "transitional" President, who would serve one term to get the country back to normal. He was supposed to endorse his Black woman successor, and let her go through a primary process like everyone else. He lied. Biden's handlers (well, Jill primarily, if we're keeping it a buck) ran him out there for a second term, and the media ran interference for him until his brains came out like diarrhea on that debate stage, then Nancy Pelosi had to come out there to basically go, "Leave, or 25th Amendment." This also explains why they tried to unalive Trump in Butler, PA. Secondly, let's put this shit to rest right now about Kuh-MAH-luh Harris. This woman was NEVER going to beat Trump, either. Hell, she couldn't even win a DEMOCRAT PRIMARY. Did y'all forget she was the FIRST candidate who dropped out in 2020? Like, quite literally got NO delegates at all, ma'am. That's how horrendous of a candidate she was. If she couldn't win over HER OWN voters, what conceit makes you think this woman was gonna win after the Democrat Establishment machine (dba ActBlue) got her over $100 MILLION, and ALL THIRTEEN HUNDRED delegates she needed IN LESS THAN THREE DAYS??? Mind you, which was AFTER circumventing the ENTIRE primary process, which disenfranchised 14 MILLION voters who picked Biden? Straight up and down, y'all Kuh-MAH-luh Harris worshipers are LOSERS. And I'm being QUITE kind when I say this. Because honestly, words like "mentally ill", "deranged" and other overused terms frankly don't do y'all justice. Y'all are no different than Jonestown residents at this point; on some "Lost Cause" shit that I don't think you are mentally or physically capable of understanding. Y'all need to move on from that drunken retard, and FAST. For your own sakes. Because if you think that doing some wack-ass Cupid Shuffle, singing Negro spirituals and electing inoffensive, non-confrontational white men to lead the DNC in saying and doing the EXACT same shit that got y'all to this point, you really HAVE gone insane. Get off the hamster wheel.

Isaiah L. Carter ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ

30,974 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 1 ะณะพะด ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

๐Ÿšจ BREAKING: Ballistics Test SHATTERS FBI's Charlie Kirk Narrative โ€“ Shot Came from BEHIND. Justice Demands Answers. Watch as RangeDayBro breaks it down frame-by-frame using a ballistic gelatin dummy rigged with a wig, chain necklace, and shirtโ€”mirroring Charlie's setup. This isn't speculation; it's science exposing the cover-up. Key Revelations from the Test: โ–ถ๏ธTemporary Wound Cavity Explains It All: The moment of impact creates explosive cavitation, pulling gel (flesh) outwardโ€”just like the plume puffing up Charlie's shirt from the back first. Front-shot? Impossible. This matches the raw footage from 9/10. โ–ถ๏ธChain Snap & Head Snap: The chain (simulating Charlie's necklace) snaps violently at the weakest point in the back, then swings forward. Head jerks down and leftโ€”exact replica of the assassination video. A front entry couldn't produce this physics. โ–ถ๏ธHairline Entry Wound: Tiny, mesh-hidden hole in the wig's back rightโ€”barely visible even after close inspection. Explains why autopsy photos show no clear frontal trauma. โ–ถ๏ธBullet Pass-Through Caught on Camera: GoPro at 240fps captures the round exiting forward, slamming into the ground. Why the rush to pave over the site? That slug could rewrite history. โ–ถ๏ธSide-Angle Smoking Gun: Cavitation blooms rearward, ripping hair without dislodging it (real scalps hold firm). Shirt billows back-to-frontโ€”undeniable proof of rear trajectory. This test isn't perfect (trajectory slightly off; next round uses exact calibers for full exit wound sim), but the results are damning: Back-right shot is not just possibleโ€”it's probable. The FBI's "lone gunman from the front" story crumbles under basic forensics. Go FOLLOW RangeDayBro and watch his FULL VIDEO Breakdown. I'll drop the link in the comments below. Also Checkout my other video below where we show you exactly how they killed Charlie and even found a person of interest we found that works for TPUSA and was holding a infrared laser trained at Charlie the exact moment he was shot. We need to identify him; we believe he acted as a spotter for the shooter that day. Share this. Tag FBI Director Kash Patel, Candace Owens โ€”demand the full autopsy, unredacted footage, and independent review. Who's really pulling the strings? Watch, share, and stand for justice for Charlie.๐Ÿ’ช

Project Constitution

46,529 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 9 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

This isn't alien technology, literally or metaphorically. The breakthrough here isn't in engineering at all โ€” it's in corporate organization. See, most machines are broken because the organizations that make them are broken. As an engineer, I would estimate that at least 30% of the parts of any given device exist only to correct for the design flaws in the other 70%. Works like this. Suppose I, an engineer, design a set of pipes and injectors to feed fuel to a combustion chamber at a consistent and controllable rate. Except in testing, there's some corner cases it doesn't handle well. Now, if you're an engineer, you understand this is normal. Nobody ever gets a design right the first time, unless it's so trivial that it's probably been done before. Your first design doesn't survive the wind tunnel, your first code doesn't compile right away, and if does, it segfaults. Your rockets blow up. And there's a flow problem with your fuel feed lines. It happens. Doesn't mean you're stupid. Means you didn't have enough information. But you have an even bigger problem. Middle management. Middle management is a special variety of hazmat suit, which is worn by the finance, sales, or market guys who run companies, so they don't have to touch the icky engineers. C-suite guys hate hate hate engineers, because it's a terrifying sensation to be dependent on someone you cannot understand, who doesn't appear to respect you much. (It does not occur to them that it is also extremely frustrating to have your work paid for, and thus controlled, by someone who cannot understand what you do, who doesn't appear to respect you much.) The primary role of middle management is talk to engineers so C-suite guys won't have to, and the primary qualification is to be a member of the right social class, and to hate engineers. This qualification is dressed up in secret handshake buzzwords like "management experience", as used in the sentence "I know you have been an engineer for twenty years and the other engineers all come to you for advice and leadership, but you don't have management experience, so I am going to hire my golfing buddy's 23 year old kid, who just graduated business school." So the fact that the fuel lines lines are not working quite right isn't your problem. That's part of the normal engineering process. Your problem is that your manager hates you and everything you stand for, and doesn't trust you or take your word for anything. He think his job is to keep you in line rather than help or empower you. So when you say "the fuel feed lines need to be redesigned", he says "we already spent six months and seventeen million dollars design the fuel feed system, we can't let you do it again." He thinks you are telling him seventeen million dollars worth of work needs to be thrown away and redone, and he cannot be told otherwise, because he cannot be told anything. So he says "you have two weeks and fifty thousand dollars to fix it". So you add another turbopump. What else can you do in two weeks? Now there's a new part. And if something goes wrong with that, another new part will be added to fix it. Because the company's actual priority isn't what you are responsible for โ€” the design. It's what middle management is responsible for โ€” the schedule and the budget. You have to play the villain so they can play the hero. What middle management doesn't understand, is paid to not understand, is what engineering actually is. Engineering is the process of making mistakes until you run out of mistakes to make. So when you spend six months and seventeen million dollars, and ended up with a design that doesn't quite work right in all cases, you weren't throwing away money, you were burning through mistakes. You've gotten a lot of them out of the way and won't make them again. But you have to get rid of some more before the design is actually right and doesn't require extra parts. The work of engineering isn't making the thing. It's teaching yourself to make the thing. Once you've done that, you can make the thing with minimal effort and time, because you know how to make the thing. C-suite financiers would hate this idea if they understood it. Why? Because it's unpredictable. Financiers like safe investments that make money. Not knowing how long something will take or how much it will cost is terrifying to them. So they train engineers to lie to them, by hiring a middle managers who try to force them to lie, and just interpret every guess as a promise if engineers still refuse to do so. But lying to yourself doesn't make the truth go away. The truth is that engineering projects take as long as they take, and cost as much as they cost. And that no one knows how long or how much they will be, because no one knows how many mistakes are waiting to be made, until they actually make them. The only thing you thing you can do about this is hire really good engineers, who catch more of their mistakes on the white board, leaving fewer to be caught in the wind tunnel, and this makes engineering faster... but it doesn't make engineering more predictable. Gantt charts are nothing but a collection of lies that corporations have taught themselves to tell themselves, lies that middle managers try to make true by enforcing them as promises. The ultimate reason that machines are 30% unnecessary parts is that the corporations that build them are 30% unnecessary people. This is what's different about Elon Musk. It's not that he's a better engineer. It's that he's a better manager. He understands engineers and engineering, and he doesn't hate them because he is one. He understood all along that green-field design is full of unknown-unknowns, and that there is absolutely no number-crunching, pie-chart, MBA magic that can eliminate this risk... it can only be hidden from view. The critical understanding is in the video clip below, where he says that SpaceX only had a 10% chance of success. You cannot say something like that unless you get it. And when you get it, you are free. Free from artificial anxiety about schedules and budgets. Anxiety about schedules and budgets is based on the delusion of control. Managers can't make a project finish "on time". They never could. The only power they have is the power to screw it up. The fate of a project is already written in the unknown unknowns before it ever starts. And the best, the absolute best, an engineering team can ever do, under any circumstances, is to confront those unknowns with clear-eyed honesty, and a willingness to adapt. Well, when you say to yourself, "This project has a 10% chance of succeeding", you've already confronted the pain of those admissions, which means you have already conquered the fear. The fear that makes you try to treat a prediction as a promise. The fear that makes you insert an extra turbopump, when what you really need to do is get busy redesigning the pipes, even though you have no idea how long it will take or much it will cost. Even when your rockets blow up. The SpaceX Raptor engine isn't just, or even primarily, a triumph of engineering smarts. It's a triumph of character. It's about an entire team with virtues MBAs lack: self-awareness, persistence, courage, humility, and, ultimately, hope. Because that's what it takes to pursue the best design, the RIGHT design, not even knowing if it exists to be found, much less whether you'll find it before you run out of money. Great things are not accomplished by middle managers with spreadsheets and Gantt charts. They are accomplished by teams of experts with passion and vision. Who are willing to risk failure so they can succeed. So what's the point in me saying all this? Am I just writing a puff piece on SpaceX and the Raptor engine? No. The point is that this is not special, one-off, magic alien technology. It's the systematic result of a correct understanding of engineering. Which means that EVERY COMPANY CAN BE LIKE THIS. If the people who control the purse strings are willing to learn from this example, and stop managing with spreadsheets and fear.

Devon Eriksen

126,518 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 7 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

โ€œYou canโ€™t yell fire in a crowded theater!โ€ How many times have you heard advocates of censorship say that? Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz repeated it last night in his debate with Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance. In so doing, Walz spread misinformation. Itโ€™s not illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater. Thatโ€™s a myth. The expression refers to a 1919 Supreme Court opinion superseded by the 1969 Brandenberg v. Ohio decision. Tim Walz had previously claimed that spreading misinformation about elections was illegal. Itโ€™s not. How could it be? If the government censored disfavored views on elections, how would we ever know if our elections were truly free and fair? I debunked Walzโ€™s claim on X last night, and itโ€™s happily now been viewed over 10 million times. As satisfying as that is, itโ€™s still not enough. If Walz and Harris get elected, they may attempt to ramp up the censorship we have been documenting and denouncing. As such, all of us who care about freedom of speech must push ourselves to find ways to persuade our fellow citizens of the benefits of free speech over censorship. Now, you might not feel like making the case for free speech personally to friends and family, and you certainly donโ€™t need to. But many people have emailed me over the last three years expressing dismay at how many Democrats they know are in favor of free speech. I share their dismay. Support among Democrats for government censorship of online misinformation grew from 40% to 70% between 2018 and 2023. It was shocking to testify before Congress on free speech issues last year only to discover how many Democrats wanted more censorship. And so I made this video for people looking for a way to talk to friends and family about censorship, one of the greatest threats to our democracy. After working on free speech issues three years ago, I realized that I had taken my support for free speech for granted. I had forgotten that my parents and others had taught me the importance of free speech. It wasnโ€™t something that came naturally. I still remember when my father explained to me why the Supreme Court let Nazis march through a neighborhood of Holocaust survivors. I remember being shocked by this and thinking such a thing lacked compassion. Only gradually, over several years, I saw the wisdom of free speech, not simply in allowing fundamental human expression but also as the best response to lies and hatred. That raises a few questions: Will the same approach that worked with me work with people today? Who needs to be persuaded, exactly? And what appears to move them? Over the last few years my colleagues and I have read through the public opinion research, interviewed, and spoken with hundreds of people in the West. One significant finding is that the people in favor of censorship today tend to be more female than male and more on the political Left than Right. And Iโ€™m happy to say that I finally feel confident in explaining what moves them to favor free speech and more opposed to censorship. The research on support for free speech is mixed. Initially, older adults were more inclined to favor restrictions, but polling by the Pew Research Center shows that this gap has closed. Similarly, a 2022 Knight Foundation survey indicated that younger people, while valuing free speech highly, have become more supportive of limiting online harmful content. However, a recent 2024 survey of Australians found that younger people were more supportive of free speech and against censorship than older people. The main reason women and people on the left are more supportive of censorship appears to be to reduce harm. This is consistent with the research by psychologists Jonathan Haidt and others that where conservatives tend to hold a broader set of traditional values, progressives have reduced the number of core values they hold strongly to just one: compassion. Earlier research found people on the Left also hold the value of freedom, but it is notably selective, as rising Democratic support for censorship shows. โ€œWomen are more supportive of illegalizing insults of immigrants, homosexualindividuals, transgender individuals, the police, African Americans, Hispanics, Muslims, Jewish people, and Christians, and are more supportive of banning sexually explicit public statements and flag burning,โ€ noted psychologist Cory Clark in Psychology Today in 2021. โ€œOne likely reason for this pattern is that women are more averse to interpersonal harm and have a relatively stronger concern for protecting others.โ€ So, to move people to support free speech, we should first appeal to compassion since itโ€™s the core value of Democrats, progressives, liberals, and people on the Left today. After you anchor people in compassion, you can make the intellectual case for why free speech is more compassionate than censorship. This approach is also critical to avoid triggering cognitive dissonance, which is the discomfort individuals feel when they realize they hold contradictory beliefs or are confronted with information that challenges their existing views. If people feel attacked or cornered, they often respond by doubling down on their beliefs to reduce this discomfort, a phenomenon known as "motivated reasoning" or "defensive processing." Avoiding accusatory language, empathetic listening, and framing the conversation around shared values can prevent defensive responses and encourage reflection. โ€œIf you must present evidence threatening to the audienceโ€™s worldview,โ€ wrote a team of psychologists in 2016, โ€œyou may be able to reduce the worldview backfire effect by presenting your content in a worldview-affirming manner.โ€ Readers of Public may recall what I discovered when interviewing people on the streets of Dublin, Ireland, about free speech. Simply slowing people down and forcing them to engage in โ€œslow thinkingโ€ rather than โ€œfast thinkingโ€ made them more receptive to free speech arguments. Slowing people down allows them to relax, remember the past, and imagine potential futures. And simply asking questions demonstrates respect and triggers a feeling of obligation by most people to offer truthful answers. How you approach the topic will depend on whether youโ€™re talking with a friend or relative or moderating a presidential debate, but it should include affirming shared values. You might say, โ€œThereโ€™s been a lot of debate about censorship and misinformation. Most of us, myself included, care a lot about protecting vulnerable people and countering bad information while protecting peopleโ€™s right to free speech. Iโ€™m curious how you think about these issues, and I wondered if I could ask you how you think about them.โ€ Assuming you get permission to go further, here are the three key questions I would recommend... Please subscribe now to support free speech, read the rest of the article, and watch the rest of the video!

Michael Shellenberger

10,563,804 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 1 ะณะพะด ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

MUST LISTEN: Congress Rep Chip Roy Exposes How Corrupt US Government Has Become โ€œIโ€™ll be damned if I'm going to empower a government to extend beyond its constitutional limitsโ€ โ€œGovernment that is now tyrannically using its power to: - Go after the American people - Go after former politicians, including the former president - That is spending money we don't have - That is using that power to regulate us to death on virtually every bill that virtually every Republican on this side of the aisle that claims to be a limited government conservative votes for Why? Because they don't want the Fraternal Order of Police or other law enforcement organizations to come after them.โ€ โ€œOver the last 16 months, there's been a battle which represents the larger war brewing within the Republican Party because unfortunately my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are so far gone, down the rabbit hole of radical progressive policies that absolutely destroy our country every single day, littering our country with regulations, littering our country with all sorts of crime, littering our country with open borders, engaging in endless wars. All of the stuff that is happening because our Democratic colleagues are frankly undermining the American dream and undermining Western civilization and undermining everything we hold dear. There's been a battle going on for the soul of the party in the country within the Republican Party. And I want to tell you, I'm not in the majority. I'm not. Say, Chip, you're in the majority in the House. You have a razor-thin majority. No, I'm not. I'm not in the majority. I'm in the minority. A minority of Republicans who try to wake up here and change this place rather than just campaign on it.โ€ โ€œI work for 750,000 Texans. I respond to them, to God, and the Constitution of the United States. I do not work for anybody in this chamber. I do not work for any organization. I don't work for any donor. I work for the people and I work for a people who are sick and damn tired of this institution run by a bunch of people who campaign saying one thing and they get here and do another.โ€ โ€œ34.5 trillion of debt, $1 trillion every three months. We already spend more on interest than our defense. We're about to crack $1 trillion of interest. They say we will hit $2 to $3 trillion of interest by 2030. - Our borders are wide open - We have kids dying. We had Austin, Texas. Four more people the other night died from fentanyl poisoning. Bunch of others had to be resuscitated with Narcan. The people of Texas are continuing to deal with thousands of people pouring across the border. It's not in the headlines right now because universities are in the headlines. But everybody in Texas who are reeling from inflation, who can't afford a car, who can't afford their home, who can't afford the interest on their mortgage, who can't afford to buy groceries, who are dealing with crime on their streets, who are dealing with open borders, they all want some sort of sanity coming out of this institution. And what do we do? What do Republicans do in all of their infinite wisdom? We fund more of it. We fund the Department of Homeland Security again. We give the FBI a brand new $200 million headquarters. You can't even make this stuff up. We give more power to the intelligence community to spy on Americans. Don't even protect Americans with warrants. You can't even make it up.โ€œ

Wall Street Apes

726,641 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 2 ะปะตั‚ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

โ€ผ๏ธTurning Point & Chloe Cole CAUGHT In A Blatant LIE About University Of Washington Event CANCELLATION!๐Ÿ‘€ Chloe Cole posted a dramatic video yesterday claiming the University of Washington event was canceled because โ€œAntifa assembled a local militiaโ€ and she was under attack by the โ€œwoke left.โ€ Thatโ€™s not true. The real reason the event was canceled? Optics. Just two days earlier, a 19-year-old transgender woman was stabbed to death in the laundry room at Nordheim Court (right on/near UW campus). The suspect is still at large, the campus is on edge, and students are scared. University of Washington spokesperson Victor Balto confirmed it straight up: โ€œMy understanding is that the national TPUSA organization has decided to cancel this event.โ€ Turning Point didnโ€™t want the terrible visual of hosting a prominent โ€œformer transgenderโ€ speaker right after a trans student was murdered on campus with the killer still loose. So instead of owning the real reason, they (and Chloe) spun it as Antifa/woke mob threats to play the victim card. Thatโ€™s not just dishonest โ€” itโ€™s straight-up gaslighting. Meanwhile, they canโ€™t even fill rooms for Erika Kirk and JD Vance eventsโ€ฆ but sure, letโ€™s blame Antifa. The public deserves the truth, not manufactured narratives. Watch the full breakdown and tell me: how many more lies are we going to let slide? ๐Ÿ‘‡ โš ๏ธATTN: My channel is under attack, and they are trying to bankrupt me to shut down my investigation into the Charlie Kirk assassination and silence the truth. if you value independent journalism and want to keep this investigation alive, please support my work here: ๐Ÿ”— ๐Ÿ’ช

Project Constitution

43,740 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 3 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

Warning: This is BOTH an announcement AND a LONG text ahead As a lot of people know, my life turned upside down "recently." I had to cancel a lot of MH projects since I didnโ€™t even know if I could make them. Honestly, it was really tough, and I relied a lot on the people around me, both in real life and in the MH community (Maple, you spent so many hours listening to my rambling โ€” I will NEVER be able to repay you... ๐Ÿฅบ) I wonโ€™t go into more details than the ones I revealed back then, but I was really in a very dark place. Iโ€™m still fighting since I have to solve so many things, but for the time being, things look brighter๐Ÿ™ I seriously and honestly cannot express how much the support of everyone in the community helped me โ€” people contacting me privately, asking each day... You really made me feel loved, and I wish I could return all this same love in the way I know best: by making the content you love and trying to keep showing how great the MH franchise is (while also showing its moments of weakness, of course) After so much rebuilding, Iโ€™m so happy to announce I will go to the Paris Games Week โ€” YOU ALL ARE CRAZY ๐Ÿ˜ญ Not only did I reach the WHOLE funding goal of 350โ‚ฌ, but some people kept sending me even more, and I reached 400โ‚ฌ! I was planning on not eating anything but bread, but now I might be able to eat something else๐Ÿ˜… AND The PGW team helped me by supporting me with Content Creator tickets! Thanks! โ˜บ๏ธโค๏ธ Iโ€™M SO HAPPY TO BE AT THE MH FESTA! I REALLY HOPE I CAN SHARE IT WITH YOU ALL! Once again, Iโ€™ll be able to meet both Ryozo-san and Tokuda-san! ๐Ÿซถ๐Ÿป (Theyโ€™re gonna get tired of my face) But thereโ€™s more โ€” the stars aligned... The very day I started playing Expedition 33, I said I would go to a concert (I was sure it would happen), and then it got announced as predicted... AND IT WAS A DAY BEFORE THE PARIS GAMES WEEK! What are the chances?! I could go to both events! Sadly, every ticket sold out the very second they were released โ€” I had no chance, it was gone. I got a bit sad, but... I was still going to the MH Festa! I had no reason to be sad! A few days later... a CONCERT FOR THE PARIS GAMES WEEK WAS ANNOUNCED! You canโ€™t imagine how happy I was, jumping around my house, almost screaming โ€” being able to have my two favourite things right in the same place โ€” a unique chance. And all of this was ONLY possible because of YOU. Thank you, everyone โ€” each RT, like, and comment made this possible. Everything you dedicated to me, a humble and small content creator, allowed me once again to make what I wouldnโ€™t have believed possible... possible. Thank you all! I have to work a lot now to see HOW I can cover the event, whatโ€™s the best way, and what tools I need for it. Anyone with good knowledge or experience on this, please let me know in DMs! #MHWilds #PGW2025 #MHFesta2025

Shincry

21,216 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 9 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

If you take a movement to unpack this visualization... You'll see how it simply breaks down how reality works. At frame 0 you have a static image. Everything is one, this is the monad. As soon as you hit frame 1 there is movement, there is change. Now you have two states, moving, or static. When Nikola Tesla says you can explain everything in frequency and vibration. The difference between frame 0 and 1, is vibration. The difference between movement and no movement. This is like binary logic we use in code which is made up of 0's and 1's. After frame 1, is when frequency emerges. Because the difference between frame 1 and all frames after is about how fast is the vibration/movement happening. If we skip forward to frame 50... You have a shape that begins to emerge, this is the 8 dots, then the 6 dots. Notice how unstable it is, it's 8 dots, then 6, then a moment with 4 in a rectangle These shapes are emergent properties. The first two emergent properties after the monad was vibration and frequency. Next comes shape (i'm skipping over rotation and direction). These shapes of dots can only exist when you have frequency and rotation. This frequency and rotation creates vortex energy. It's the same energy that things like your chakras use. Or the same energy we harness in devices like engines, airplanes, fans, blenders, hard drives, etc. It's also the same vortex energy you'll see in a tornado or hurricane. They are powered because they harness rotation and frequency(change/movement). Going back to the video, notice that it is inside the entire shape, the internal structure is manifesting before the external structure does. Then around frame 60 the hexagon of circles begins to rotate. First it was the two dots that moved and now it's a complex shape that is coming to life. This is a higher dimension (or lower depending on how you look at it) manifesting into existence. The internal state is "awakening" and experiencing it's own change like what happened to the whole shape in the first frames. But it is unstable. That's why it doesn't persist for long. If you think of the 8 dots being the octahedron, they map to the element of air. Air is in the material world, but it is not something you can see. The brief moments the 8 dots are visible is similar to that effect. They are only experienceable between a small frequency band of frames. Now here's where stability begins to appear in the internal structure. This is when the 4 dots appear. You'll see that the four dots, the square, is stable and persists the most visibly for the most amount of frames. The square represents earth in the platonic solids to elements mapping. Earth, is material, it's stable. We build our buildings in squares and with earth because it is a solid shape to build on. This visualization shows you why. Across different vibrations (frame rates) it can self sustain. Between this point and frame 180, you'll see a new emergent property. Which is depth. A new dimension is introduced at around frame 90 but really becomes visible at around frame 110. You can see a foreground and background. There is the shape of the dots, but also the triskellion wave happening in the background. Let's jump to frame 180. Notice how it is the same as frame 0 except... It's flashing. If you were paying attention, you'll notice you could see flashing at frame 90 and frame 120, but they didn't persist for long. At around 150 it started to reach stability and 180 it was solidified. Between frames 150 and 180 there is flashing, but the image is still moving. Only for a brief moment at frame 180 is the movement frozen and the flashing persists. Think of that like your computer screen. It's what your screen is doing right now as you read this. Even tho the text isn't moving, the screen is flashing at 60 or 120hz. The images appear on your device because this flashing brings things to life. The entire material realm and your physical body right now, is doing the same thing. While you look solid... You're flashing in and out of existence at very high frequencies. You can look at frame 180 and frame 0 as the same essence but it is the mid point between an octave change. In the video, the ying and yang was vertical, now it is horizontal. This is a phase shift. If you notice at exactly frame 180, the rotation freezes and then the direction of rotation changes. The process then repeats all the way to frame 360 but in the opposite sequence. Once it reaches frame 360, that is an octave change and the process repeats. Each time you repeat the process is a layering of the same patterns into higher octaves. This is the same as your chakras or how other things work. They are like russian nesting dolls where every octave is layering onto the next. The complexity of your body is a layering of basic principles that emerged in earlier stages. Your organs are built of systems that are built with cells that are built with proteins that are built with atoms and so on. The atoms, work just like your body at a basic level. Your body works just like the galaxies. At each level you'll have the same pattern. This is where the idea "As Above, So Below" from. The monad, splits in two, and so on and so on. One cell, splits into two through mitosis in the same logic. We could spend all day going through examples of how biology, physics, spirituality, etc. aren't really different. They are just categories that we use to dissect these frequencies and octaves of energy but they only start paying attention within the confines of materialism. The problem is, none of the sciences start at the root patterns. Because that is reserved for religion or spirituality. It's too woo-woo to take seriously so it's dismissed. And because of that... We're left ignorant on the simple explanations for how things work. Now you need some expert with tools you don't have access to in order to explain things. When you could be understanding them without the tools. The Yin and Yang symbol in this video is 3,000 years old. It's simple. Yet I just showed you how it explains deeper layers of reality.

Jamal โ˜ฏ๏ธŽ ๐Ÿ”†๐Ÿง˜๐Ÿฝ๐Ÿง 

13,149 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 4 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด

Every night as a kid, Kobe Bryant fell asleep visualizing basketball. Heโ€™d see himself scoring 10 straight. Then 20. Then 30. โ€œBut in the dream, why would you ever interrupt that?โ€ โ€œSo you keep dreaming.โ€ โ€œBefore I go to sleep, Iโ€™m at 120 points.โ€ In 2006, he scored 81. Kobe spent an hour at USC explaining what Mamba Mentality really means: He was born to play. "I started playing at like 2 years old." "My father wasn't one of these fathers that was like: you're going to play basketball. It was just I was around the game a lot and I gravitated to the ball." "I was completely geeking out about the smell of the ball. The way it sounds when it hits concrete versus how it hits a parquet floor." "The sound of the nets. The different material of the nets." "There's certain basketball hoops where the rim sits slightly above the backboard. I was geeking out if I got into a gym where they were completely parallel." "Little shit like that would freak me out." "To answer your question, I was born to do this thing, man. And I did it non-stop all day long from the age of 2 to when I retired." He explains how to know if you've found your thing. "That's the trick, isn't it? Finding what you love to do." "We talk about hard work all the time. And it's like, if you got to get up every single morning and remind yourself how hard you need to work, you probably need to choose a different profession." "That shouldn't be there." "I wake up in the morning excited to get to it. If I'm not training, I'm missing it. If I'm not watching a game of basketball, I miss it." "There's no place I'd rather be." "If you have that feeling, then you're truly doing what God has put you on this earth to do." He explains the 81-point game. "When you grow up downloading that into your brain over and over and over..." "That summer, I made 1000 shots a day. 1000. On top of weight training and conditioning." "And they weren't just shots. They were shots that you saw in that game." "Coming out of the corner. Going to the pinch post. Footwork in the post. Coming off the screen." "It was very specific." "So when you download that into your system and you go out on the court, you're just executing things that you've done thousands of times before." "And you have that dream." "Then that becomes possible." He explains why he doesn't reinvent. "Everything's been not choreographed, but it's been practiced so many times that it's second nature." "Why reinvent it?" "I don't understand that. You go out and play the game and you're just trying to create something new. No." "This is what I do. This is what I do extremely well." "You're going to have to stop me from doing that. And if you do stop me from doing that, I have a counter to that." "Done." He explains the pain. "To be honest, I wasn't even thinking about the game." "My knee was hurting so much. I didn't know then, but I had a flap of cartilage stuck in my joint line." "My mind was really trying to go to a place where I don't feel that pain." "The game started. And because of that, I was just in a different space." "I wasn't worried about what was to come. I wasn't worried about what just happened. I was just here." "When you're just there in the moment, your focus is heightened because nothing else matters." Pete Carroll asked the hard question. "What was it like for you to play with people that weren't as gritty as you were?" Kobe's response. "I'd kill them. I'd bury them." "The kind of culture that the Laker organization stood for, winning championships, is not tolerated." "You're going to show up to play. And you're going to lollygag through this scrimmage, through this drill? I'm going to beat you." "I'm going to let you know I beat you." "I'm going to want you to reconsider your professional life choice." "People will say: okay, that doesn't make a great teammate." "Well, I'm not here to be a great teammate. I'm here to help you win championships." "So it's different." He explains practice. "As a leader of a team, it's your responsibility to elevate the rest of the guys." "What people tend to get stuck on is saying: the way to make players better is to pass them the ball when they're open." "That's a very trivial way to look at things." "You have to get them emotionally to want to be better. You have to get them to an emotional space where they wake up every morning driven to be the best version of themselves." "How do you do that?" "In practice for me, it was a chance to drive them, to challenge them." "You have to know your teammates. Because then you know what nerve to touch." "Some guys, it's like: okay, come on, we can do this. That'll get them going." "Other guys, no. You got to figure out what button to push." He gives an example. "Pau was always Spain." "If I tell him how they lost in the gold medal to us and how they're going to lose again, how I'm going to beat your ass in practice just like I beat you in the gold medal game." "Oh. He would hate that. He would hate that." "But that's what practice was. You have to drive them." "If practice is more intense and harder than a game seven will be, then a game seven will be easy." "But if it's not, then that's when teams start folding and capitulating." He explains standards. "If I got to fight to get you in the gym, that's a problem. That's a problem." "You want players that are gym rats. Players that want to be in the gym, that want to work." "Then from there, you build on top of that." "But if you're lazy, man, I don't want to talk to you. I don't want to deal with you. You make me feel dumber." "You're going to lower my level. I don't think so." "You can go over there. There's plenty of teams where you'll fit right in." He explains loyalty. The Lakers offered to trade him to a contending team. His response. "We've known each other for a very long time. I'm questioning myself because I'm wondering what about me makes you think I would jump ship." "We don't do that." "As a leader, you got to be able to take the good with the bad." "You can't just because the ship's sinking all of a sudden jump off and swim to another. You don't do that." "If you can win championships in front of everybody, then you could miss the playoffs in front of everybody." "You got to be able to take both sides of it." "If you're doing something that's easy, you might want to reconsider what you're doing." He explains what he wishes he knew earlier. "Understanding empathy and compassion." "As a young kid when I came in the league, it was like: I'm driving this way and either you're going to be on the train or be on the track." "There was no such thing as understanding that people have lives outside of the game. Which apparently I did not." "If I understood that at an early age, then it helps me as a leader to communicate better." "Getting to know people on a personal level. What are their fears. What are their insecurities. What are their dreams and ambitions." "When you come to understand that about a person, then you can help them reach the best version of themselves." "I wish I'd known that earlier." He explains how he teaches his daughter. "My daughter said: Dad, can you teach me how to play basketball? I want to be better than you." "All right, cool. Let's start with 15 minutes a day." "For 15 minutes a day, we just stood right in front of the hoop and just shot. Right under the hoop. We didn't move around. We didn't do any dribbling." "Just 15 minutes a day just shoot here." "You do that for a month and a half. Then next month, you step back. Then next month, you step back again. Then you start working on dribbling." "Through actionable things is how we teach our children." "If it becomes a part of their process in sports, it'll become a part of their process in life as well." He explains dreams. "I just dream. I have dreams." "Dreams should be pure." "A lot of times when we're born into this world, we actually wind up going backwards." "The more we mature, the more responsible our dreams become. The more governors we put on ourselves and our ability to dream and to reimagine." "It's always a fight for us to make sure that our dreams always stay pure." "It's not a matter of pushing beyond your limitations or expectations." "It's really a matter of protecting your dreams. Protecting your imagination." "That's really the key." "When you do that, then the world just seems limitless."

Jaynit

17,383 ะฟั€ะพัะผะพั‚ั€ะพะฒ โ€ข 2 ะผะตััั†ะตะฒ ะฝะฐะทะฐะด