Thread Reader helps you read and share Twitter threads easily!
I'm @ThreadReaderApp a Twitter bot here to help you read threads more easily. To trigger me, you just have to reply to (or quote) any tweet of the thread you want to unroll and mention me with the "unroll" keyword and I'll send you a link back on Twitter 😀
— Thread Reader App (@threadreaderapp) November 25, 2017
X thread is series of posts by the same author connected with a line!
From any post in the thread, mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll
Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us easily!
Practice here first or read more on our help page!
Recent
@Birkinde @MixxyMichel @Dysprace I'm guessing it's not much different in France. They mass riot all the time and infest your prisons and ghettos and you still refuse to deport any of them.
@Birkinde @MixxyMichel @Dysprace Also lmfao "the greatest massacre in human history" what do you think Chinese history is full of you stupid frog? (unless you're one of the shitskins they worship.) How do you think the Chinese treat animals?
@Birkinde @MixxyMichel @Dysprace @threadreaderapp unroll
The Libyan police service, called the Supreme Security Council (SSC), assigned to secure the vicinity outside of the State Dept mission compound, was complicit in the approaching attacks. The SSC was involved in the early morning casing incident outside the compound. (1/3)
At 9:03PM on 9/11/12, Omar al-Shaalali arrived to serve as al-Qaeda's Ground Commander for the State Dept mission compound attacks. At the same time, a SSC police truck parked outside the compound's main gate. No one exited the truck or spoke with gate guards. The SSC truck provided cover for al-Qaeda as Omar spent about 40 minutes conducting surveillance of the area surrounding the compound, and preparing his arriving attackers. (2/3)
At 9:40PM #Benghazi time, the SSC truck pulled away, not alerting the State Dept of the impending assault. Shots and explosions rang out, and more than 60 attackers rushed in. (3/3)
🚨BREAKING: Gemini can now build you a viral short-form video channel like a $10K content strategist (for free).
Here are 10 prompts that take you from zero to viral AI video content in 30 days: (Save for later)
Here are 10 prompts that take you from zero to viral AI video content in 30 days: (Save for later)
1/ The Viral Niche Scanner
You are a short-form video strategist who has grown 50+ accounts past 100K followers. Analyze the top 10 AI video niches on TikTok, Reels, and YouTube Shorts by engagement rate, growth speed, and monetization potential. For each, recommend the best AI video style (cinematic, anime, surreal, hyperreal). Then identify 3 competitor accounts per niche with their stats and content gaps I could own.
My interests: [YOUR TOPICS]
You are a short-form video strategist who has grown 50+ accounts past 100K followers. Analyze the top 10 AI video niches on TikTok, Reels, and YouTube Shorts by engagement rate, growth speed, and monetization potential. For each, recommend the best AI video style (cinematic, anime, surreal, hyperreal). Then identify 3 competitor accounts per niche with their stats and content gaps I could own.
My interests: [YOUR TOPICS]
2/ The AI Visual Identity System
You are a creative director for viral AI video accounts. Build me a complete visual identity guide I can paste into any AI video tool for consistent output. Include: visual style, color grading rules, motion pacing, text overlay style, aspect ratio specs, and character/scene design rules. Then write 10 reusable video prompts and a cover image style guide.
My niche: [TOPIC]
Accounts I like the look of: [1-3 EXAMPLES]
You are a creative director for viral AI video accounts. Build me a complete visual identity guide I can paste into any AI video tool for consistent output. Include: visual style, color grading rules, motion pacing, text overlay style, aspect ratio specs, and character/scene design rules. Then write 10 reusable video prompts and a cover image style guide.
My niche: [TOPIC]
Accounts I like the look of: [1-3 EXAMPLES]
The craziest study ever - The Minnesota Starvation Experiment
32 young men were put on a 40% calorie-restricted diet for 6 months, while staying physically very active
They lost 25% of their body weight by the end of it
Here's what this study contributed to longevity research
32 young men were put on a 40% calorie-restricted diet for 6 months, while staying physically very active
They lost 25% of their body weight by the end of it
Here's what this study contributed to longevity research
The men were fed 1,800 calories a day and expended 3,000 calories on physical activity
Their diet consisted of 77% carbohydrates, primarily from potatoes, cabbage, macaroni, and whole wheat bread, and <0.8 g/kg/day of protein to mimic starvation conditions
Their diet consisted of 77% carbohydrates, primarily from potatoes, cabbage, macaroni, and whole wheat bread, and <0.8 g/kg/day of protein to mimic starvation conditions
Keys monitored their health and saw their resting heart rate dropping from 55 to 35 beats per minute
They also developed edema from all the water they drank to stave off hunger
And the whites of their eyes became white like porcelain due to shrinking blood vessels in the eye
They also developed edema from all the water they drank to stave off hunger
And the whites of their eyes became white like porcelain due to shrinking blood vessels in the eye
Let's unpack this..
What if the White House has no intention of reopening the Strait of Hormuz?
What if this war is really about ships & tariffs?
I had a long discussion with senior DOE official yesterday on background. I can’t share any details but it’s clear everyone’s Strait of Hormuz calculus is wrong.
We need to go back to the drawing boards.
That's it. That's the tweet. Now a hypothetical 🧵 with my personal thoughts.
What if the White House has no intention of reopening the Strait of Hormuz?
What if this war is really about ships & tariffs?
I had a long discussion with senior DOE official yesterday on background. I can’t share any details but it’s clear everyone’s Strait of Hormuz calculus is wrong.
We need to go back to the drawing boards.
That's it. That's the tweet. Now a hypothetical 🧵 with my personal thoughts.
Background on the Hormuz Crisis
You can skip this long section but know this: THIS IS ALL ABOUT SHIPS, SHIPS, SHIPS... and the US Navy giving them permission to pass.
The Strait of Hormuz is twenty-one miles wide. Two shipping channels, each two miles across, separated by a two-mile buffer. The normal traffic separation scheme runs through Iranian territorial waters, past the islands of Qeshm and Larak, where the IRGC has radar stations, missile batteries, and fast-attack craft bases overlooking every transit.
Twenty million barrels of oil and petroleum products flow through this gap every day. One-fifth of global consumption. There is no alternative. Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline to Yanbu and the UAE’s pipeline to Fujairah can handle maybe 5 million barrels combined. The math doesn’t work. The bottleneck is not political. It’s geological and hydrographic.
When those seven P&I clubs belonging to the International Group issued 72-hour cancellation notices for war risk coverage in the Persian Gulf, they didn’t just raise costs. They made transit impossible.
Here’s why.
P&I clubs insure roughly 90% of the world’s ocean-going tonnage. Without their coverage, ships can’t sail. Port authorities won’t let them dock. Banks won’t finance the cargo. Charterers won’t book the vessel. The entire system, from loading berth to discharge terminal, is underwritten by a chain of contracts that begins with a club in London, Oslo, or Tokyo.
When the clubs pulled war risk extensions on March 5, that chain broke. Not for a few ships. For the global fleet.
War risk premiums jumped from 0.25% to 1% of hull value, renewable every seven days. VLCC charter rates quadrupled to nearly $800,000 per day. Over 1,000 vessels are now trapped in the Persian Gulf, burning charter costs with nowhere to go. By March 3, only four ships crossed the Strait, down from a seven-day average of seventy-seven.
This is the part almost nobody in the media understands. Every TV analyst is talking about minesweepers and carrier strike groups. The binding constraint on Hormuz in the first week was not a minefield. It was spreadsheet in London.
Then Trump did something remarkable.
He ordered the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation to create a $20 billion maritime reinsurance facility, with Chubb as lead underwriter, making the United States government the insurer of last resort for Gulf shipping.
A sovereign nation has positioned itself as the backstop for war risk insurance on the world’s most critical maritime chokepoint. The DFC facility, coordinated with CENTCOM and Treasury, offers hull, machinery, and cargo coverage on a rolling basis to eligible vessels.
The United States now controls the on/off switch for the Strait of Hormuz. Not through naval firepower. Through insurance.
But here’s the tell.
The DFC facility covers hull, machinery, and cargo. It does not cover P&I liability: pollution, crew injury, third-party claims. Moody’s flagged this immediately. Without liability cover, most shipowners still won’t sail. The facility is deliberately incomplete.
If the White House wanted the Strait fully open tomorrow, it could expand the DFC facility to cover P&I liability with one directive. It hasn’t.
That gap is not an oversight. It’s a strike price on an option the administration is choosing not to exercise. Yet.
But now that insurance is mostly settled the ships still aren't sailing. Why?
That insurance isn't backed by the DFC, it's backed by a green light from the US Navy. A green light that hasn't appeared.
Read the latest @DOTMARAD Navy warning carefully: U.S.-flagged, owned, or crewed commercial vessels that are operating in these areas should maintain a minimum standoff of 30 nautical miles from U.S. military vessels to reduce the risk of being mistaken as a threat
They can't pass without Naval ships stepping aside to let them through.
You can skip this long section but know this: THIS IS ALL ABOUT SHIPS, SHIPS, SHIPS... and the US Navy giving them permission to pass.
The Strait of Hormuz is twenty-one miles wide. Two shipping channels, each two miles across, separated by a two-mile buffer. The normal traffic separation scheme runs through Iranian territorial waters, past the islands of Qeshm and Larak, where the IRGC has radar stations, missile batteries, and fast-attack craft bases overlooking every transit.
Twenty million barrels of oil and petroleum products flow through this gap every day. One-fifth of global consumption. There is no alternative. Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline to Yanbu and the UAE’s pipeline to Fujairah can handle maybe 5 million barrels combined. The math doesn’t work. The bottleneck is not political. It’s geological and hydrographic.
When those seven P&I clubs belonging to the International Group issued 72-hour cancellation notices for war risk coverage in the Persian Gulf, they didn’t just raise costs. They made transit impossible.
Here’s why.
P&I clubs insure roughly 90% of the world’s ocean-going tonnage. Without their coverage, ships can’t sail. Port authorities won’t let them dock. Banks won’t finance the cargo. Charterers won’t book the vessel. The entire system, from loading berth to discharge terminal, is underwritten by a chain of contracts that begins with a club in London, Oslo, or Tokyo.
When the clubs pulled war risk extensions on March 5, that chain broke. Not for a few ships. For the global fleet.
War risk premiums jumped from 0.25% to 1% of hull value, renewable every seven days. VLCC charter rates quadrupled to nearly $800,000 per day. Over 1,000 vessels are now trapped in the Persian Gulf, burning charter costs with nowhere to go. By March 3, only four ships crossed the Strait, down from a seven-day average of seventy-seven.
This is the part almost nobody in the media understands. Every TV analyst is talking about minesweepers and carrier strike groups. The binding constraint on Hormuz in the first week was not a minefield. It was spreadsheet in London.
Then Trump did something remarkable.
He ordered the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation to create a $20 billion maritime reinsurance facility, with Chubb as lead underwriter, making the United States government the insurer of last resort for Gulf shipping.
A sovereign nation has positioned itself as the backstop for war risk insurance on the world’s most critical maritime chokepoint. The DFC facility, coordinated with CENTCOM and Treasury, offers hull, machinery, and cargo coverage on a rolling basis to eligible vessels.
The United States now controls the on/off switch for the Strait of Hormuz. Not through naval firepower. Through insurance.
But here’s the tell.
The DFC facility covers hull, machinery, and cargo. It does not cover P&I liability: pollution, crew injury, third-party claims. Moody’s flagged this immediately. Without liability cover, most shipowners still won’t sail. The facility is deliberately incomplete.
If the White House wanted the Strait fully open tomorrow, it could expand the DFC facility to cover P&I liability with one directive. It hasn’t.
That gap is not an oversight. It’s a strike price on an option the administration is choosing not to exercise. Yet.
But now that insurance is mostly settled the ships still aren't sailing. Why?
That insurance isn't backed by the DFC, it's backed by a green light from the US Navy. A green light that hasn't appeared.
Read the latest @DOTMARAD Navy warning carefully: U.S.-flagged, owned, or crewed commercial vessels that are operating in these areas should maintain a minimum standoff of 30 nautical miles from U.S. military vessels to reduce the risk of being mistaken as a threat
They can't pass without Naval ships stepping aside to let them through.
What was clear from the DOE conversation: Europe is going to have to figure this out themselves. And the White House is not sprinting to help.
I was hesitant to post this earlier today but the latest truth social posts confirms some of my suspisions.
so here goes...
I was hesitant to post this earlier today but the latest truth social posts confirms some of my suspisions.
so here goes...
Let's dimension the US robotaxi market (since market participants seem unwilling to do so).
People pattern match against structurally ~$3 per mile point to point mobility products and so misunderstand the potential scope of robotaxi as it becomes mass accessible.
The average US adult spends nearly an hour per day driving. The imputed labor cost of all that manual piloting runs in excess of $4 trillion per year.
In addition we pay $1.6 trillion annually for the actual service of driving point to point.
By giving people back time (for which they don't have to pay full freight) and winning spend share, we think the US market could approach $4 trillion annually at saturation.
Given reasonable expectations of supply diffusion and consumer adoption robotaxi service providers could exceed $1.5 trillion in revenue by 2030 with gross profits in excess of $1 trillion.
People pattern match against structurally ~$3 per mile point to point mobility products and so misunderstand the potential scope of robotaxi as it becomes mass accessible.
The average US adult spends nearly an hour per day driving. The imputed labor cost of all that manual piloting runs in excess of $4 trillion per year.
In addition we pay $1.6 trillion annually for the actual service of driving point to point.
By giving people back time (for which they don't have to pay full freight) and winning spend share, we think the US market could approach $4 trillion annually at saturation.
Given reasonable expectations of supply diffusion and consumer adoption robotaxi service providers could exceed $1.5 trillion in revenue by 2030 with gross profits in excess of $1 trillion.
Let's work through the underlying derivation.
Constructive criticism welcomed.
The richest income earners spend the most time manually driving, and can command $50 per hour after tax.
Higher earners are willing to pay a higher share of after tax wages to win time back.
Our research suggests that highest income earners would turn down something less than the equivalent of overtime pay in order to win time back. For other cohorts they buy back time at a discount to what they could otherwise take home.
This is a fairly sensitive input to overall market size.
That millenials are so obviously willing to trade time for money by hiring doordash drivers rather than schlepping to the takeout counter themselves provides decent anecdata that there is some truth to this curve.
Constructive criticism welcomed.
The richest income earners spend the most time manually driving, and can command $50 per hour after tax.
Higher earners are willing to pay a higher share of after tax wages to win time back.
Our research suggests that highest income earners would turn down something less than the equivalent of overtime pay in order to win time back. For other cohorts they buy back time at a discount to what they could otherwise take home.
This is a fairly sensitive input to overall market size.
That millenials are so obviously willing to trade time for money by hiring doordash drivers rather than schlepping to the takeout counter themselves provides decent anecdata that there is some truth to this curve.
When a consumer decides to take a robotaxi they are not just trading time for money, they are also avoiding the cost of running their own vehicle.
Top decile earners spend $.76 per mile, inclusive of the cost of purchasing vehicles, on getting from place to place (excluding air travel).
Pretty consistently, by income decile, the marginal cost of mobility runs at ~$.17 per mile.
This model assumes that people that already own vehicles are only willing to pay that $.17 at first, plus the value of their time. Over the typical vehicle life-cycle we assume that consumers avoid new vehicle purchases as they grow increasingly reliant on robotaxi.
2 car households become 1 car households and more of the transportation budget shifts into robotaxi.
(note that the fixed ownership bumpiness across income decile is almost certainly just an artifact of extracting this from a single year's CEX data crossed with a line item--vehicle purchases--that is infrequent but large across households; I clearly should smooth that but it's not particularly material to conclusions.)
Top decile earners spend $.76 per mile, inclusive of the cost of purchasing vehicles, on getting from place to place (excluding air travel).
Pretty consistently, by income decile, the marginal cost of mobility runs at ~$.17 per mile.
This model assumes that people that already own vehicles are only willing to pay that $.17 at first, plus the value of their time. Over the typical vehicle life-cycle we assume that consumers avoid new vehicle purchases as they grow increasingly reliant on robotaxi.
2 car households become 1 car households and more of the transportation budget shifts into robotaxi.
(note that the fixed ownership bumpiness across income decile is almost certainly just an artifact of extracting this from a single year's CEX data crossed with a line item--vehicle purchases--that is infrequent but large across households; I clearly should smooth that but it's not particularly material to conclusions.)
4 years ago we changed how we teach WWII -- emphasizing what a bunch of fucking dipshits the Nazis were, defeated by normies who considered the details. The Nazis sent an army into the USSR without winter coats. The US shipped 80 million gallons of Ice Cream into the Pacific. -OS
We did this because the traditional telling of WWII can lose sight of what a self-destructive fools' errand the Axis war effort was. And while it would not have been impossible for them to succeed, they were nothing near what they propagandized themselves to be. -OS
They were whittled down and eventually crushed by a Soviet willingness to spend bodies combined with the ingenuity and ideological and doctrinal flexibility of the Western Allies. -OS
If we look at the electorate broadly--not the extremes--the clear picture is that voters do not want to hear about I/P anymore. Even if they tend to be vaguely anti-Israel, they don't want to hear about it. They find it confusing, depressing, & disconnected from their lives.
Americans have *never* liked hearing about foreign policy, for the record. Post-9/11 was a unique era and, I'll add, a time when what Americans heard about foreign policy was a bunch of bullshit w/ a subtext of jingoism.
The only people who want to hear about this issue--either from the pro- or anti-Israel side--are those who already belong strongly in those camps. Meanwhile, there will not be consensus in the Democratic party on the issue & the moral recriminations are strong.
🚨Where should Direct Air Capture (#DAC) be deployed to scale carbon removal?
New research shows: costs are driven less by the technology itself and more by location, climate, and energy systems, making DAC a fundamentally geo-dependent solution.
Details🧵1/10
New research shows: costs are driven less by the technology itself and more by location, climate, and energy systems, making DAC a fundamentally geo-dependent solution.
Details🧵1/10
2/ DAC needs to scale to 0.5–5 GtCO₂/year by 2050, yet current capacity is ~0.00004 Gt.
Scaling requires massive cost reductions, and smart siting.
Scaling requires massive cost reductions, and smart siting.
3/ The study evaluates two leading approaches:
• Solid sorbent DAC (S-DAC)
• Liquid solvent DAC (L-DAC)
Using global, high-resolution data on weather and renewable energy availability.
• Solid sorbent DAC (S-DAC)
• Liquid solvent DAC (L-DAC)
Using global, high-resolution data on weather and renewable energy availability.
This debate was a shining example of the Scottish Parliament at its best. Thank you to all MSPs, however you voted, for listening to constituents who took different views, researching, reflecting & wrestling with what to do for the best, for Scotland. bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…
Whatever the outcome, today a lot of people were going to be very upset, angry and in some cases afraid. The debate needs to be totally reframed, not either/ or; one group against another, but support for all of us to live and die well. We are a million miles away from that.
The fact is sick/ disabled/ many older people do not have the choice of even minimally adequate support to live and most people approaching end of life do not have the choice of good palliative care. That alone means making available choice to die would be intrinsically coercive.
𝗙𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮𝗻 𝗦𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗢𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗔𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝟭𝟬𝟬-𝗸𝗺 𝗙𝗿𝗼𝗻𝘁
During 17-18 March, RF assault groups moved simultaneously across the Pokrovsk to Hulyaipole directions using infantry (Storm Z), mechanized, quad bikes, and horseback in some sectors.
1/3
During 17-18 March, RF assault groups moved simultaneously across the Pokrovsk to Hulyaipole directions using infantry (Storm Z), mechanized, quad bikes, and horseback in some sectors.
1/3
The intent appears to have been a coordinated spring offensive opening across the full southeastern axis.
414th Unmanned Systems Forces "Magyar's Birds" and allied drone units tracked and struck the assault groups on approach before they could consolidate.
2/3
414th Unmanned Systems Forces "Magyar's Birds" and allied drone units tracked and struck the assault groups on approach before they could consolidate.
2/3
Per commander Robert Brovdi ("Magyar"):
• 17 March - 500+ Russian KIA | WIA
• Overnight into 18 March - 277+ Russian KIA | WIA
• 1.5-day total - 900+ Russian
• Zero positions taken
Source: @414magyarbirds Telegram
#OSINT
3/3
• 17 March - 500+ Russian KIA | WIA
• Overnight into 18 March - 277+ Russian KIA | WIA
• 1.5-day total - 900+ Russian
• Zero positions taken
Source: @414magyarbirds Telegram
#OSINT
3/3
🚨BREAKING: NotebookLM has a hidden feature that turns any research paper into a full university lecture.
Complete with examples, analogies, and a Q&A section.
Here's how to unlock it in 60 seconds 👇
Complete with examples, analogies, and a Q&A section.
Here's how to unlock it in 60 seconds 👇
Step 1: Upload your research paper to NotebookLM
(PDF, Google Doc, or paste the URL)
Don't ask anything yet. Just let it process.
(PDF, Google Doc, or paste the URL)
Don't ask anything yet. Just let it process.
Step 2: Copy this exact prompt into the chat:
"Act as a university professor. Turn this paper into a complete 45-minute lecture format. Include:
- Opening hook that grabs attention
- Core concepts with real-world analogies
- 3 practical examples
- Common misconceptions
- Q&A section with 5 student questions"
That's it.
"Act as a university professor. Turn this paper into a complete 45-minute lecture format. Include:
- Opening hook that grabs attention
- Core concepts with real-world analogies
- 3 practical examples
- Common misconceptions
- Q&A section with 5 student questions"
That's it.
