Most recent unrolls from @ThreadReaderApp
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…
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
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
eine instabile Partnerschaft und Druck durch den
Die häufigsten persönlichen und von den betroffenen Frauen formulierten Begründungen für einen Schwangerschaftskonflikt sind
eine instabile Partnerschaft und Druck durch den
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.
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,
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
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.
Today, my dad sold all his hbar and launched the H-Network. Learn what it does here.
They are now looking for investors.
My dad is the Stephen Curry of tech. He is revolutionary.medium.com/@therealdaniel…
They are now looking for investors.
My dad is the Stephen Curry of tech. He is revolutionary.medium.com/@therealdaniel…
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?
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)
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)
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)
3)
[ALL EXTRACTS ARE FROM CHAT GPT]
The paper by Charles Matthew Whish was titled:
“On the Hindu Quadrature of the Circle, and Infinite Series for π” -1835-
Whish didn’t say “Newton copied India.”
He was more measured—but his implication was clear:
youtube.com/shorts/FRYxDZ6…
The paper by Charles Matthew Whish was titled:
“On the Hindu Quadrature of the Circle, and Infinite Series for π” -1835-
Whish didn’t say “Newton copied India.”
He was more measured—but his implication was clear:
youtube.com/shorts/FRYxDZ6…
Advanced mathematical ideas resembling calculus existed in India well before Newton.
Whish studied palm-leaf manuscripts attributed to Madhava of Sangamagrama and his successors.
What startled him:
They had infinite series expansions for π, sine, cosine, and arctangent
Whish studied palm-leaf manuscripts attributed to Madhava of Sangamagrama and his successors.
What startled him:
They had infinite series expansions for π, sine, cosine, and arctangent
These were strikingly similar to the later work of Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
And crucially—they predated them by 200–300 years.
The Kerala School discovered key building blocks of Calculus earlier.
And crucially—they predated them by 200–300 years.
The Kerala School discovered key building blocks of Calculus earlier.
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. 👇
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:
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.”
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.”
Recently I found a “secret weapon” from Google that makes learning much more effective.
Its name is NotebookLM.
Upload lecture notes, PDFs, or book chapters, then ask him to test you like a fierce lecturer.
This is not just an ordinary summary. It’s like having a private professor 24 hours. Want to know how? This thread must be read. 👇
Its name is NotebookLM.
Upload lecture notes, PDFs, or book chapters, then ask him to test you like a fierce lecturer.
This is not just an ordinary summary. It’s like having a private professor 24 hours. Want to know how? This thread must be read. 👇
I used to worry a lot before the exam.
Reread the notes, but it’s still blank right in front of the question.
Now? I use NotebookLM to make a mock exam that looks super similar to the real exam. The result? Self-confidence increased drastically.
These are the 10 most powerful prompts I use:
Reread the notes, but it’s still blank right in front of the question.
Now? I use NotebookLM to make a mock exam that looks super similar to the real exam. The result? Self-confidence increased drastically.
These are the 10 most powerful prompts I use:
Prompt 1 (Most Powerful):
“Act as my strict university professor. Using ONLY the uploaded sources, make a full mock exam for this course.
• 20 MCQs
• 10 short answers
• 5 long answers
• 3 case studies
Customise the difficulty level with the real final exam.”
“Act as my strict university professor. Using ONLY the uploaded sources, make a full mock exam for this course.
• 20 MCQs
• 10 short answers
• 5 long answers
• 3 case studies
Customise the difficulty level with the real final exam.”
After 50, you lose muscle every single year.
Not because you're aging.
Because you're starving your body of the right building blocks.
Two studies just dropped this month proving it.
Here's what they found and how to reverse it 🧵
Not because you're aging.
Because you're starving your body of the right building blocks.
Two studies just dropped this month proving it.
Here's what they found and how to reverse it 🧵
Study #1 published March 2026.
38,073 adults across 27 European countries tracked over 2 years.
The finding:
Low protein intake = significantly higher rates of weak grip, slow walking speed, and physical decline.
The damage starts at 50. Most never recover.
38,073 adults across 27 European countries tracked over 2 years.
The finding:
Low protein intake = significantly higher rates of weak grip, slow walking speed, and physical decline.
The damage starts at 50. Most never recover.
Study #2 published this month in Frontiers in Nutrition.
The takeaway: the standard protein recommendation (0.8g/kg) is dangerously low for adults over 50.
Why?
Aging muscles develop "anabolic resistance".
They stop responding to protein the way younger muscles do.
The takeaway: the standard protein recommendation (0.8g/kg) is dangerously low for adults over 50.
Why?
Aging muscles develop "anabolic resistance".
They stop responding to protein the way younger muscles do.
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.
...
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.
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.
Watch carefully, and with discipline.
..
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.
Watch carefully, and with discipline.
..
how we implemented Moondream inference on Apple Silicon (spoiler: we don't use MLX)
⬇️ (1/N)
⬇️ (1/N)
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
I’ve been strumming all my strings
Playing songs that quietly sing
In a theater
The audience never found
Playing songs that quietly sing
In a theater
The audience never found
Where the echoes know my name
But they never stay the same
Every whisper
Falls like rain without a sound
But they never stay the same
Every whisper
Falls like rain without a sound
So I play for empty chairs
For the ghosts that linger there
In the silence
Comes the cheer of the crowd
For the ghosts that linger there
In the silence
Comes the cheer of the crowd
「抵抗の枢軸」の幻想が招いたイラン経済の自壊
本記事にある
「イラン中央銀行がペゼシュキアン大統領に提出した内部評価報告書」に基づき、イランの現状について読み解きます。
※長文になります
4月14日イラン国際通信（Iran International）
iranintl.com/en/202604135100
本記事にある
「イラン中央銀行がペゼシュキアン大統領に提出した内部評価報告書」に基づき、イランの現状について読み解きます。
※長文になります
4月14日イラン国際通信（Iran International）
iranintl.com/en/202604135100
⑴. 構造的自縛：地理と政策の二重の罠
記事が示すイランの最大の脆弱性は、年間貿易の90%以上がホルムズ海峡に依存しているという地理的事実だ。 これ自体は地政学的宿命とも言えるが、問題はイラン政府がその脆弱性を数十年にわたって放置・悪化させてきたことにある。
記事が示すイランの最大の脆弱性は、年間貿易の90%以上がホルムズ海峡に依存しているという地理的事実だ。 これ自体は地政学的宿命とも言えるが、問題はイラン政府がその脆弱性を数十年にわたって放置・悪化させてきたことにある。
ホルムズ迂回を意図したジャスク・ターミナルは実効処理能力が日量約7万バレルにとどまっており、 代替ルート全体でも現行輸出量の10%未満しか補えない。
これは「抵抗経済」を標榜しながら、経済インフラの多角化において政府が根本的に失敗したことを物語る。
これは「抵抗経済」を標榜しながら、経済インフラの多角化において政府が根本的に失敗したことを物語る。
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.
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.
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: ⬇️
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;⬇️
- 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⬇️
- a transição p/ a Puma como fornecedora global, fazendo dela ferramenta de internacionalização da marca do clube⬇️
what if i told you... computer use can be faster on local models
moondream3 with its photon update today that gives it mac support can see your screen and use it with 1s latency, ty @vikhyatk
here we have whisper+qwen+moondream triple model pipeline working offline flawlessly
moondream3 with its photon update today that gives it mac support can see your screen and use it with 1s latency, ty @vikhyatk
here we have whisper+qwen+moondream triple model pipeline working offline flawlessly
excuse the annoying voice i was trying not to wake baby
chaining longer tasks is possible but needs more work, i will release that soon. till then we have codex cua support for longer tasks.
app is goatremote.com
chaining longer tasks is possible but needs more work, i will release that soon. till then we have codex cua support for longer tasks.
app is goatremote.com
but ya i think computer use running fully locally is imminent at this point
it's not as complicated as coding and such. it doesn't need as much intelligence either. cloud computer use doesn't make sense to me in longer run
it's not as complicated as coding and such. it doesn't need as much intelligence either. cloud computer use doesn't make sense to me in longer run
1 HILO DEL SENTIMENTALISMO AL RENCOR
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 +
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
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…
"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…
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
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 !
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 .
2/3
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 .
2/3
@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
3/3