Economic Bastich

🤣🤣🤣🤣💯🎯👍👇

One of the men charged in the Pearson gold heist case was allegedly posting luxury travel, high end cars and lavish lifestyle content online shortly after the robbery. According to airport workers interviewed in this documentary, this kind of sudden lifestyle shift wasn’t exactly subtle.

Take whatever news about "peace deal" or extending the ceasefire with a grain of salt. It's all part of a plan to drop the price of crude to a favorable "restarting level"...

@DarioCpx Traders are simply greedy. Anything they do is simply manipulation so they can make more. This whole market is rigged.

Globex futures just resumed trading from where they paused last week: “traders shorting crude oil futures after realising that car tanks and airplanes can be refilled with hopes”

@ShaziGoalie This is unacceptable. This is not what "higher education" is about. The kids of today are frauds. The professor should fail them all. The school should penalize the students. If not, the degree means nothing. Today's culture accepts fraud. Hence why life is more difficult.

HIGHER 🇨🇦 EDUCATION HAS AN AI PROBLEM. A Western University professor alleges the majority of students in his third-year healthcare law course cheated on their final exam using AI. 55% scored above 90%. 8% got perfect on the multiple choice. A tech analyst warned universities need to figure this out FAST because if employers and the public stop trusting the integrity of degrees, the value of those degrees collapses. Students are now openly saying you’re at a disadvantage if you DON’T use AI. The value of degrees is about to get seriously questioned.

So there is still no deal, and yet oil is down, and futures are up.

How many times can executives in interviews on Bloomberg or CNBC say the word "ai" in a 1 to 2 minute segment? The average is now 40 to 50 times.

On what?

@Sassafrass_84 @PigWar Apple is for non techies to look cool. SAMSUNG is for people confident in themselves and not wanting to be in a cult. Honestly I can not stand what Apple does and how it does it. Samsung is so much more logical and better. Iphones are over priced and too simplistic.

Guys... my friend @PigWar is trying to convince me to change my phone from Samsung to an iPhone. I have been a LOYAL customer of Samsung for years. She says it's better. A heck of a lot better. What say you? Team Samsung or Iphone?!?

@Babywwir 20 for 20 Kids have no clue how much things were better then.....

7 for me!! I feel confident nobody Has all 20 How many for you?

@1CoastalJournal @MyTimeToShineH

Punisher is a crazy psycho in Spider-Man Brand New Day 😱

So, war?

@unusual_whales What is this, fake news N0# 1578?

BREAKING: The U.S. and Iran have agreed in principle to a deal that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a U.S. official said, per NYT

@IstrianMario Porec. I need to come back and we have to go to Konuba Daniela and get the Steak Tartar. Or sit with u again and have a few beers....

Obviously I'm biased, but it's the best place to live along the coast.

You've got to watch this full video on the SpaceX IPO 🤣 Is this the top?

Thomas Sowell: “When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.”

On the Oreshnik and the eternal question about the warhead There is a particular type of commentator who, after every Oreshnik strike, routinely asks the same question. Was there even a warhead in it this time? The question is meant to suggest that the weapon, without a classical explosive payload, is somehow fake or less dangerous. What it really reveals is that the person asking does not understand how the system works. A conventional ballistic missile carries explosives or a nuclear warhead. The destruction comes from the detonation at the target. The missile is essentially the delivery service. The Oreshnik works differently. It is an intermediate-range missile (range around 5000 kilometers) carrying multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV). These reentry vehicles enter the atmosphere at roughly Mach 10 to Mach 12, with Russian sources claiming higher in some cases. That works out to 3 to 3.5 kilometers per second on terminal approach. This is where the physics comes in. Kinetic energy is calculated as E = 0.5 times mass times velocity squared. Velocity enters the equation as a square. A reentry vehicle of a few hundred kilograms, on impact alone, releases energy in the range of several tons of TNT equivalent. With multiple submunitions per missile, that adds up. A tungsten or steel core entering the ground at this speed produces temperatures of several thousand degrees through friction and compression shock. Bunkers and hardened installations are not destroyed by an explosion, they are destroyed by the sheer force and heat of the impact itself. The technical term is kinetic penetration. Now to the actual answer for the warhead-askers. Yes, the Oreshnik is nuclear-capable. This was part of the design from the start, not a retrofit, but a built-in configuration option. Russian officials have stated this openly. The carrier is there. The only question is what it carries. But that is exactly the point the warhead-asker skips over. The whole point of the Oreshnik is that even in its conventional configuration it achieves an effect that previously required nuclear weapons against hardened targets. To destroy an underground command bunker, historically you needed a small tactical nuclear weapon. Today a reentry vehicle at Mach 10 with a few hundred kilograms of mass is enough. No radioactive fallout, no crossing of the nuclear threshold, no political price attached to a nuclear use. In a strike on a major city, the nuclear configuration would, in this conflict, almost certainly not be deployed. Not because it does not exist, but because it is neither necessary nor politically tenable for that purpose. The conventional version is sufficient to send a message without crossing the threshold above which entirely different chains of escalation are set in motion. In short. The question "was there a warhead in it?" misses the point. The Oreshnik does not need a large warhead, because its velocity is the weapon. It can carry a nuclear warhead, at any time. It just does not do so in the current conflict, because it does not have to.

I love that !! Charlie was locked and loaded for That Question !!! @charliekirk11

🚨 TUCKER GUEST WARNS AI DATA CENTRES MAY NOT JUST BE ABOUT TECHNOLOGY — BUT THE FUTURE OF HUMAN CONTROL Economist Richard Werner made a chilling claim: That the build-out of massive AI infrastructure could support a future system of: Programmable money. Permission-based spending. Digital restrictions tied to behaviour, location or compliance. His argument: CBDCs combined with AI could eventually create unprecedented levels of financial surveillance and control. Supporters say these systems would improve efficiency and security. Critics fear something very different — A world where access to money becomes conditional.

48 samples were taken. 47 showed no traces of gas. The 48th showed high levels of gas. That sample (the 48th) was taken from a small delousing chamber. The 48th sample shows that gas would still be detectable nearly 50’years after saturation. The other 47 destroy the narrative. Take from it what you will.

Oxygen already killed most of the life on Earth once. The first time it filled the air, around 2.4 billion years ago, it was so poisonous that nearly everything alive died. Scientists call it the Oxygen Catastrophe. Back then the oceans were full of tiny microbes, and none of them used oxygen. Then one kind, an ancestor of the green scum you still see on ponds, started giving off oxygen as a waste gas, the same way you breathe out air you don’t need. Oxygen is a wrecker. It rips apart the delicate machinery inside a living cell, including the DNA, and as it built up in the water and then the sky, it triggered the first mass extinction this planet had ever seen. A few survivors hid in the mud and deep underground where the gas couldn’t reach, and some of their descendants are still down there. But one tiny cell did something nobody else did. It ate a bacterium that had learned to use oxygen rather than die from it, and instead of digesting its meal, it kept it alive inside itself. That trapped bacterium became the mitochondria, the little engines that power your cells right now. Almost every cell you are made of carries hundreds or thousands of them, all descended from that one strange truce with a poison. The trade was worth it because burning food with oxygen releases about 18 times more energy than burning it without. It is the reason anything can swim fast or think hard. Every big, fast-moving animal on Earth, you included, runs on the gas that almost ended life. Oxygen changed the sky too. Some of it floated up high and turned into ozone, a thin layer that blocks most of the sun’s harshest rays. Before that shield existed, raw sunlight was strong enough to fry the DNA of anything out in the open, so life had to stay underwater, where a few feet of sea soaked up the danger. For almost two billion years, nothing lived on land at all. Only once the ozone grew thick enough, a few hundred million years ago, did the first plants and animals crawl out of the water. And the old poison never really left. Every second, the oxygen your cells burn throws off tiny broken bits called free radicals, and they keep nicking your DNA and the proteins around it. The damage adds up, slowly, your whole life. Back in 1956 a scientist named Denham Harman suggested this slow rusting from the inside is a big reason we get old. People still argue about how much it matters, and no antioxidant pill has ever been shown to make anyone live longer, but the basic idea has held up. The gas keeping you alive right now is also quietly wearing you down, year by year. The joke just got the timing wrong. Oxygen really does kill slowly, and billions of years before we showed up, it already proved it can kill fast.