Bitte schaut euch alle diesen Artikel von 1000plus an:
Tag für Tag werden abertausende Frauen ungeplant und ungewollt schwanger. Viele von ihnen geraten in einen schweren, inneren Konflikt und müssen sich zwischen 1000plus.net/de-de/about/mi…
einer Abtreibung und einem Ja zu ihrem Baby entscheiden.
Die Erfahrung aus der Beratung hunderttausender Frauen und Familien hat uns gelehrt: Schwangerschaftskonflikte haben einerseits persönliche und individuelle Begründungen. Andererseits nehmen auch gesellschaftliche und
kulturelle Faktoren erheblichen Einfluss auf die Entscheidung in einem Schwangerschaftskonflikt.
Die häufigsten persönlichen und von den betroffenen Frauen formulierten Begründungen für einen Schwangerschaftskonflikt sind
Gedanken zur Tageslosung für Samstag, den 02.05.2026
Losungswort
Lass meinen Gang in deinem Wort fest sein und lass kein Unrecht über mich herrschen.
Psalm 119,133
Lehrtext
Wer von sich sagt, dass er mit Gott verbunden ist, soll auch so leben, wie Jesus gelebt hat.
1. Johannes 2,6
Die Losungen der Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine
„Lass!“
Heute möchte ich einmal vom Lehrtext ausgehen. Dieser beginnt mit den Worten: „Wer von sich sagt, dass er mit Gott verbunden ist …“ Nun, wer an Jesus Christus glaubt,
ist ja mit Gott verbunden und kann das also auch von sich sagen. Doch dann folgte der zweite Teil des Lehrtextes: … der „soll auch so leben, wie Jesus gelebt hat.“ Das klingt sehr herausfordernd.
Bevor ich allerdings überlege, ob so etwas überhaupt
3. Mose 8,1-12
Die Aufgabe eines Priesters • Die israelitische Gemeinde versammelt sich zur Amtseinsetzung • Aaron und seine Söhne werden gereinigt • Die Kleidung des Hohenpriesters • Die Weihe des Hohenpriesterstwr360.org/programs/view/…
„Durch die Bibel“ ist ein weltweites Bibelprogramm in über 100 Sprachen und Dialekten. Unsere Mission ist einfach und sie ist dieselbe, die Dr. McGee für sich selbst annahm: Das ganze Wort Gottes der ganzen Welt zu verkündigen.
Did you know the H-Network can be licensed for use by state and federal governments to help preserve life in cases where the U.S. officials thinks a nuclear missile incoming attack is imminent?
Currently I have 55 followers. So once I am at 155, I will start DM’ing! Get ready, get ready, get ready!
Did you know? The H-Network can drive traffic to all chains?
President Trump nominated Dr. Nicole Saphier, a breast radiologist and former Fox News contributor at Memorial Sloan Kettering, as his third choice for U.S. Surgeon General on May 1, 2026. 1)
The nomination follows withdrawal of Dr. Janette Nesheiwat's bid in 2025 over academic credential concerns and Dr. Casey Means' stalled Senate confirmation due to questions on her incomplete residency, inactive license, and vaccine positions.
2)
Saphier supports aspects of the MAHA agenda like reducing ultraprocessed foods while advocating vaccinations, patient choice, and women's health initiatives, positioning her as a more conventional pick with clinical credentials.
3)
If I sold my company tomorrow, I would build my next million-dollar business from scratch in under 90 days — using only Claude.
This is the exact system I’ve refined for myself.
On day one, I’d assemble a complete 5-person AI team.
Steal the full playbook below. 👇
Too many founders fall in love with their idea before checking if real people actually need it. I’ve seen it cost fortunes.
That’s why my first move is always validation — powered by AI.
Here’s the precise 5-role AI team I’d deploy immediately:
Role 1: The Researcher
Task: Deeply understand the customer’s most pressing problems with real-world proof.
My prompt:
“Act as a meticulous senior researcher. Identify the top 5 most painful, urgent problems for [target audience]. Draw evidence from forums, reviews, social media, and real conversations. For each problem, quote the exact language customers use, what they’ve tried already, and where current solutions fall short.”
There is a peculiar tendency among crowds—particularly those that fancy themselves technical, principled, and ideologically pure—to require an enemy in order to maintain the illusion of unity. Not agreement, mind you. Agreement is far too demanding. Unity, in these circles, is little more than synchronized hostility. Remove the object of disdain, and what remains is not harmony, but noise—petty, incessant, irreconcilable noise.
BTC has, for some time, been less a system than a coalition of disagreements temporarily disguised as a network. Its participants do not share a coherent vision; they share a convenient adversary. The factions—economic minimalists, fee-market purists, speculative opportunists, protocol tinkerers, ossification zealots—have never truly aligned. They have merely tolerated one another under the dim, flickering light of a common opposition. That opposition, inconveniently for them, has been singular.
The uncomfortable truth is that the only thing preventing fragmentation was not technical consensus, nor economic inevitability, nor some grand philosophical cohesion. It was focus. A target. A figure upon which every grievance, every insecurity, every contradiction could be projected. That focal point served as a crude but effective binding agent. Remove it, and the adhesive fails.
During COPA, the spectacle was almost theatrical in its clarity. Individuals and groups that could not agree on block size, transaction policy, scaling philosophy, governance, or even the definition of the system itself suddenly found remarkable coherence in opposition. It was not that they converged intellectually; they converged emotionally. They did not resolve their disputes; they postponed them. One does not need unity of purpose when one has unity of resentment.
Had the outcome been different—had that focal point remained intact in their narrative as a defeated adversary—the cohesion would not have dissolved. It would have intensified. The myth would have grown. The divisions would have remained carefully concealed beneath a shared story: that victory had been achieved, that the matter was settled, that the system could now proceed unchallenged. Of course, it would have been nonsense, but nonsense, when collectively agreed upon, can be remarkably stabilizing.
Instead, what emerges is something far less convenient for them: the absence of a unifying antagonist. And without that, the underlying fractures are no longer optional—they are inevitable.
What follows is not subtle. It will not be a neat schism, nor a dignified bifurcation. It will be fragmentation in the most inelegant sense. Not one fork, nor two, but a proliferation—each justified by its own narrow doctrine, each claiming legitimacy, each convinced of its necessity. When a system cannot adapt internally, it externalizes its disagreements. It forks not because it is strong, but because it lacks the capacity to reconcile.
And here lies the deeper irony. The very individuals who insisted on immutability, on the sanctity of an unchanging protocol, will find themselves repeatedly altering their own environment—not by design, but by fracture. They will not call it failure. They will call it choice. They will insist that multiplicity is strength, that divergence is innovation, that fragmentation is freedom. Language, after all, is wonderfully accommodating when one has no intention of being precise.
Different groups want different things. That is not controversial; it is structural. Some want higher throughput, others want constrained capacity. Some want programmability, others want austerity. Some want institutional alignment, others want ideological purity. These are not minor variations—they are mutually incompatible objectives. If the system cannot accommodate them natively, then the pressure does not disappear. It relocates. And the only mechanism available for relocation is division.
...
The notion that BTC will simply decline into mediocrity is almost charitable. Mediocrity implies stability. What is more likely is a slow, undignified splintering into variants, each less coherent than the last, each attempting to solve a problem that was never resolved at the foundation. It will not merely be poor; it will be plural in the most chaotic sense—multiple implementations, multiple narratives, multiple incompatible futures all claiming to be the present.
As for what must be done, the answer is neither reactive nor theatrical. There is no need to chase fragmentation; it will occur without assistance. The more effective approach is to remain precisely what has proven disruptive: consistent, singular, and unwilling to dilute definition. Systems built on clarity do not require enemies to function. Systems built on ambiguity do.
There is a temptation, of course, to engage—to correct every misstatement, to respond to every provocation, to insert oneself back into the center of their discourse. That would be a mistake. The moment one becomes the focal point again, one restores their cohesion. One gives them back the very mechanism that prevented their collapse.
Better, then, to allow the absence to do its work.
Let them argue without a target. Let them attempt alignment without opposition. Let them discover, slowly and publicly, that what they called consensus was merely convenience. The resulting spectacle will be less dramatic than a single decisive failure, but far more instructive. It will reveal that the system was never held together by shared understanding, but by shared aversion.
And when that aversion has nowhere left to go, it turns inward.
Mark the time with something more durable than enthusiasm. Two and a half years will suffice—not tomorrow, not next quarter, not in the impatient rhythm of those who demand immediate spectacle as proof. Fix the horizon properly, then return to it with a memory that has not been conveniently edited.
At the outset, there will be denial. There is always denial. It arrives dressed as confidence, speaking in the brittle tone of those who mistake repetition for certainty. “Nothing has changed,” they will insist, while everything quietly rearranges beneath their feet. They will demand immediacy—results by the week, vindication by the month—because long horizons expose short thinking. Resist that trivial cadence. The process in motion is not theatrical; it is structural.
Observe instead.
Watch the emergence of the so-called quantum-resistant variants—each promising salvation from a threat not yet realized, each quietly redefining the system they claim to preserve. They will not agree on implementation, nor on necessity, nor even on timing. Yet each will insist on inevitability, because inevitability is the last refuge of uncertain engineering.
Watch the institutional strains—those shaped not by protocol integrity but by regulatory appetite and capital preference. These will not announce themselves as compromises; they will present as maturity. They will speak the language of compliance and stability while quietly bending the system toward external constraint. And in doing so, they will diverge, because institutions do not align by principle; they align by jurisdiction, and jurisdictions do not agree.
Watch the covariance experiments—subtle at first, cloaked in technical language designed to discourage scrutiny. These will fracture along lines so abstract that only their consequences will be visible: incompatible assumptions, divergent risk models, systems that cannot reconcile because they were never designed to do so.
Watch the sidechain derivatives—each a polite admission that the base cannot accommodate what is desired. They will proliferate under the banner of flexibility, each extending functionality in a direction the others do not share. And when extension becomes contradiction, the polite façade dissolves.
None of these developments will exist in isolation. They will overlap, intersect, and—most importantly—conflict. Each group will believe it is extending or protecting the system. Each will claim legitimacy. And because the base cannot natively reconcile these competing objectives, the pressure will not dissipate. It will fracture.
Do not expect a single, dramatic schism. That is far too orderly. Expect instead a multiplication—variants emerging not from strength, but from unresolved disagreement. Some will retain the BTC designation, clinging to it as though a name were a substitute for coherence. Others will adopt new tickers, new identities, new narratives, while quietly inheriting the same unresolved contradictions. The distinction will be cosmetic. The origin is shared.
They will argue over which is “true,” as though truth were determined by volume. They will litigate meaning in forums and conferences, substituting rhetoric for resolution. Some will refuse to engage, choosing instead to depart under a different banner, insisting they have transcended the conflict when they have merely relocated it.
And throughout, there will be a persistent insistence that nothing fundamental has changed.
That insistence is the most reliable indicator that everything has.
So record this. Fix it in place without embellishment, without revision. Return to it not in a week, nor in the shallow impatience of those who require instant validation, but at the appointed time. Two and a half years. Enough for divergence to become visible, for contradictions to mature into separation, for the quiet fractures to render themselves undeniable.
Photon, our inference engine, isn't fast just because of GPU kernels. A lot of the speedup comes from engine-level work: request scheduling, prefix caching, image processing, all tuned to keep the GPU saturated. moondream.ai/p/photon
Our engine is highly coupled with PyTorch. ~15k lines of Python and Rust... scheduler, KV manager, radix tree prefix caching, LoRA, image pipeline, skill state machines.
Porting all of that to MLX would've mean maintaining two parallel runtimes forever... ouch.
🚨 BREAKING: “Death to America” Comes to @virginia_tech
At Virginia Tech tonight, Mohamed Abdou opened his “Death to the Akademy” speech by declaring, “We are in a war, a racial religious war since 1492.”
He told students America is “the larger monster,” praised “General Sinwar,” called October 7 the “blessed day of Al-Aqsa Flood,” and said jihad can mean defending life “using the sword.”
Then he praised students as “a branch of the resistance” and said they were recognized as “a branch of the mujahideen.”
And when he explained “Death to America,” he was explicit.
“When we say Death to America, we mean, and loud and clear, a total end to U.S. empire. The destruction of this crusading settler colony, their entire project.”
Virginia Tech spent the last few days insisting this event was not happening. It happened. And this is what was said.
Stick around, because there is a lot more to unpack. We are not even halfway through his speech yet.
Attention: @CACIIntl, @SystemsPlanning, @MITREcorp, @LeidosInc, @northropgrumman, and @LockheedMartin.
You all have documented partnerships, funding relationships, or national-security recruiting pipelines with Virginia Tech.
You may want to know what Mohamed Abdou told students there.
He urged people to “halt the weapons industry,” “destroy locally where you are at,” and disrupt “every single choke point” and “every single supply chain bottleneck” by “all means necessary.”
Why should any defense contractor keep investing in a university that is trying to downplay this?
You already heard Mohamed Abdou frame this as a “racial war” and invoke jihad.
He told students not merely to oppose Hitler, but to “understand what Hitler stands for.” Then he immediately claimed the “modern Zionist entity” manifests a “Hitlerite mentality.”
He went further, racializing Jews as white people who can pass unnoticed unless they are “wearing a yarmulke,” which erases the identity and lived reality of Jews of every background worldwide.
1/ According to the Linear B' tablets found in the Palace of Pylos, Poseidon appears to have held the central position in the religious pantheon, surpassing Zeus in importance. He was the patron of the royal house and the city at large, as well as the main recipient of offerings.
2/ Poseidon as the patron god of Pylos constituted the cornerstone of the organisation of the kingdom. The Pylian wanax derived the right to rule as a descendant of Poseidon. According to mythology, the founder of the royal dynasty of Pylos, Neleus, was the son of Poseidon.
3/ At the same time, the tablets of Pylos demonstrate the main role played by the worship of Poseidon in the economic activity of the kingdom, as the palace managed large areas of land belonging to the god (sacred lands). These areas of land were called ktoines and 👉
By popular demand! Tomorrow is the 4th anniversary of the Dobbs leak. Let's talk about what did and didn't happen after Dobbs.
Obviously lots of states passed or brought into effect abortion bans after Dobbs. But while pro-lifers won the battle, pro-choicers are winning the war.
First, a number of states with initiative processes have enacted or reinstated abortion rights.
For example, Ohio passed Issue 1 in 2023, creating a state constitutional right to an abortion before viability.
In 2024, 7 states passed abortion rights ballot initiatives. Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New York, and Nevada all enacted broad abortion rights. A majority of Florida voters also voted for one, but were stopped by a 60% threshold imposed by GOP lawmakers.
FINALMENTE, EVOLUÇÃO NO MKT DO SPFC?
Rafael Soares, atualmente Diretor de Marketing do Bahia, PODE substituir Eduardo Toni no São Paulo.
Há reunião marcada no início da semana c/ Massis.
Seu trabalho na SAF do Grupo City é bem avaliado, com realizações como: ⬇️
- protagonismo no aumento p/ R$367,5MM da receita operacional líquida da SAF em 2025, quase 55% mais q no ano anterior;
- recordes comerciais históricos em receitas de patrocínios e venda de produtos licenciados;⬇️
- revolução no programa de sócio-torcedor, elevando a receita de R$28MM em 2022 p/ R$85MM em 2025, c/ a base de sócios passando de 45.000 a 76.000;
- a transição p/ a Puma como fornecedora global, fazendo dela ferramenta de internacionalização da marca do clube⬇️
La mayor parte de las personas menores de 45 años han sido manipuladas desde la escuela, para que den una importancia desmesurada al sentimentalismo
El sentimentalismo es el camino directo hacia el rencor +
2 Al caer en el sentimentalismo están perdidos.
Cualquier cosa la interpretará en función de algún sentimiento ofendido,
Así la manipulación política se reduce a exacerbar sentimientos desde la "moralidad"
Especialmente se centran en los sentimientos que les dicen la TV
3 Esta técnica esta tomada del futbol
"Los forofos embisten, no razonan"
Los militantes igual cafyd.com/HistDeporte/ht…
❗️ Hot take Friday: Precision oncology is the biggest narrative scam in cancer medicine. “Find the right gene and we’ll cure cancer.” We’ve been hearing this for 30 years. Meanwhile, surgery and radiation are still the only things that actually cure solid tumors. Let’s go 🧵
New Nature paper just dropped tracking lung cancer evolution from dx to death across every met. 79% of mets had unique subclones not found anywhere else. There is no “the mutation.” There are thousands of mutations, evolving independently, in real time. nature.com/articles/s4158…
62.5% of patients had MULTIPLE primary subclones seed DIFFERENT metastases. Each met then seeded other mets.
The notion of precisely targeting a driver is largely based on completely false premises
@LawPium @le_Parisien Va te faire soigner . En France, nous sommes censés être universalistes !
Tout voir selon le prisme de la couleur de peau et donc de la race comme le font ces arriérés d'anglosaxons, est racialiste ET RACISTE !
@LawPium @le_Parisien Il n'y a qu'un seul racialiste/raciste ici, c'est toi !
Les médias, artistes, oeuvres caritatives, croix rouge, unicef… disent que les "petits" Africains meurent de faim, et DONC, n'importe quel Collégien* est censé y être sensibilisé .
@LawPium @le_Parisien *N'importe quel Collégien : quel que soit la couleur de peau ! On s'en tape de la couleur, bande de dégénéés racialistes ! (encore un juge qui doit se dire "gôche" en ayant abandonné cet avant-gardisme sociétal qu'est l'universalisme de la France! 3/3