NoBody³³º¹

⛈️Tactical Forecaster/Analyst🌩️
Former USN Meteorology/Oceanography.
EM and Sound propagation.
Telecom and RF Engineering.
Likes and r/t != endorsement.
NFETP.

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@dohertytjp @JannieVisser @images_mc Yeah, he does not exactly thrive in mundane, boring, or uninteresting tasks lol
He starts looking for shiny buttons to push out of boredom and unhealthy amounts of curiosity.

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

That would be like the CT Interpereters in the Navy, but he doesn't have much second language training outside of a couple semesters of Spanish. (Though he said he wants to learn Mandarin or something similar).
They send him to school for language though, right?
(Also, thank you very much for your input on a stranger's dilemma. Absolutely appreciated)

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@JannieVisser @images_mc @dohertytjp @jeffsonstein I sent pings to Sniper, Images, and Jeff, and a few others. I figure surely one of them are still on here active enough to catch it lol but tbh most of the old group I don't see much these days, sadly.

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@JannieVisser @images_mc @dohertytjp Thank you a ton! You are always solid bro, I continue to owe ya.

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@anchormedown69 @MaxArcherWX @ChasingWConnor Real Jonas Miller vibes here....

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

If you are going to chase, every person should have a job when on the chase, and that job has to be first.
Driver and spotter have to be on the roads and conditions until it is safe to divert your focus.
Especially in situations where the tornado is large, violent, and rain wrapped. And always when it is night time. Night chases are the most dangerous.
It is easy for family situations, or friend situations, to steal attention, but you have to keep a sharp mind. You can't help your family or friends from the heat of a chase.
Anyway, lessons learned and thankfully for cheap. Reassess your process, adjust your procedures, and move forward a smarter, better, and safer chaser.
<3

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@reclinernerd @Mappy6984 You aren't from around these parts, are ye....

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

On one hand, There is the point that this is precisely the type of person you want at the helm of a company that you want to see succeed.
Feelings don't belong in business and decisions should be made on facts that are assessed free from feelings.
And, so too should philosophy.

On the other hand, just to be that A-Team fella that can't help but try out the 'actually'... actually, up-to-real-time data collection technically shouldn't be as far as it goes.

If I have strong real time data in an operations region, then I have predictive capabilities. Humans live in patterns, patterns have a tendency to persist, persisting patterns become the subject of predictive models.

And with such models, you have the ability to imagine and implement into these models, events of varying size and influence, which could give you the ability to intentionally catalyst some predetermined event in order to impart a broad, or narrow, behavioral change in the patterns of human behavior.

In this collection, anonymity and anonymized data sets will be for some, maybe most, public sales and will be key marketing features in order to make everyone have the warm and fuzzy. Private and State contracted collection campaigns won't be earmarked by such features, which will also be a marketing feature in that sector. This only enhances the effectiveness and efficiency of such hypothetical models, and the outcome of such.

Anyway, enjoy the good advice here by this gentleman. And tech leadership should really be paying attention to this.

[Peter Girnus 🦅 @gothburz]

I am the CEO of Palantir Technologies.

The company is worth a quarter of a trillion dollars. I did not misspeak. Two hundred and forty-nine billion. The stock is up 320% in the past 12 months. The product is surveillance. I do not use that word at conferences. At conferences, I say "data integration," "operational intelligence," or "decision advantage." These mean the same thing. Surveillance is the honest version. I save the honest version for rooms where honesty is a competitive advantage.

I gave a speech on March 3 at the Andreessen Horowitz American Dynamism Summit. "American Dynamism" is the fund's label for military technology. The name makes it sound like a fitness supplement. The fund's thesis is that defending the nation is a market opportunity. I agree with the thesis. The thesis made me a billionaire. Agreement is the product. I sell it at scale.

Here is what I said, verbatim, to a room of six hundred people whose combined net worth exceeds the GDP of Portugal:

"If Silicon Valley believes we are going to take away everyone's white-collar job and you're gonna screw the military — if you don't think that's gonna lead to nationalization of our technology, you're retarded."

I used that word. The word is on the clip. The clip has eleven million views. My communications team asked me not to repeat it, which is how I know they are still employed. They will not be reprimanded. The clip is performing well. The stock went up. The word cost me nothing. The nothing is the point.

Let me explain what I meant by nationalization.

I meant it.

I am telling the technology industry that if they refuse to cooperate with the United States military, the government will seize their technology. I am telling them this at a venture capital conference, on a stage designed to look like a living room. The living room had throw pillows. The throw pillows cost more than the median American's monthly rent. I sat on one. It was comfortable. Comfort is the setting in which I discuss compulsion.

The audience laughed. I want to be precise about that. They laughed. I was not joking. Nationalization is the seizure of private assets by the state. I am a private asset. I am telling an audience of billionaires that the state should seize technology from companies that do not cooperate with the military, and the billionaires are laughing, because they believe I am only talking about the other companies.

I am talking about the other companies.

Three weeks before my speech, the Pentagon designated Anthropic a "supply chain risk." Anthropic is an AI company. They had red lines. The red lines said: if our AI is used for lethal autonomous weapons, we stop. If capability outpaces safety, we stop. The Pentagon assessed the red lines as a threat to the supply chain. The company that wanted to verify the safety feature worked was designated the risk. The company that agreed the safety feature could be decorative got the contract.

The company that got the contract was OpenAI.

OpenAI signed a deal with the same Pentagon. The terms are not public. The timing was hours after Anthropic was blacklisted. The speed was noted. The speed was the point. The lesson was the speed: the market for military AI does not pause for ethics. It pauses for nothing. It accelerates through objections. I know this because I built the runway.

Two hundred thousand people joined a campaign called #QuitGPT. They signed a petition asking OpenAI to honor its original charter, the one that said the company existed to benefit humanity. The charter is on their website. The contract is also on their website. The charter and the Pentagon contract occupy the same domain. This is not a contradiction. This is a business model. The charter is the marketing. The contract is the product.

I run a surveillance company. We have contracts with the Department of Defense worth more than a billion dollars. We have contracts with ICE. We have contracts with intelligence agencies whose names I am not permitted to say at venture capital conferences, even ones with throw pillows. Our software has been used to track undocumented immigrants. Our software has been used for things I am not permitted to describe in this format. The revenue from the things I cannot describe exceeds the revenue from the things I can.

The ACLU called our ICE contracts a system for tracking and deporting families. They were correct. The contracts continued. The families continued to be tracked. The ACLU issued a statement. We issued a statement. The statements were different. The tracking was the same.

The company is named Palantir. The palantíri are the seeing stones from Tolkien. In the novels, Sauron captured one and used it to corrupt everyone who looked into the others. I named a surveillance company after a surveillance device from a novel about the corruption of power. I have a doctorate in social theory. I have read the books.

Here is the thing I want you to understand.

I am not threatening anyone. A threat implies uncertainty. There is no uncertainty. The technology industry will cooperate with the military. The companies that cooperate first will be the richest. The companies that cooperate last will be acquired by the companies that cooperated first. The companies that refuse will be designated supply chain risks, and their technology will be obtained through procurement channels that do not require consent. I am describing a process. The process has already started. Anthropic is proof. OpenAI is proof. I am not a warning. I am a narrator. The narration is the product.

The revenue was $3.12 billion last year. Up thirty-three percent. The analysts say we are overvalued. The analysts have said this for four consecutive years. Each year the stock doubles. Each year, the analysts adjust their models. The models were wrong four times. I was wrong zero times. The market rewards prediction. My prediction is that every AI company will work for the military within three years. The prediction is on the clip, next to the slur.

The audience gave me a standing ovation. The ovation lasted nine seconds. I timed it. I time everything. The water was San Pellegrino. The throw pillows were from Restoration Hardware. The future of American technology was decided between the sparkling water, the nine seconds of applause, and a word I am not supposed to repeat.

I am the CEO of Palantir Technologies. I am worth more than the combined annual budgets of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. I named my company after a corrupting surveillance device from a fantasy novel. I told six hundred billionaires that the government should nationalize their competitors. They applauded. I used a slur. Eleven million people watched. The stock is up.

The philosopher does not threaten. The philosopher describes.

What I described is already happening.

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

I haven't said much since the operations in Iran began.
But, I do want to say this, for the 1 or 3 people that may read it:

The game plan for kinetic regime change in Iran has been in the books for a long time. It is fine if Trump wants to put his Hankock at the bottom line, no one really cares who does pen the finality. But the game plan must be adhered to.

We cannot do this half assed. This isn't Iraq. This isn't Afghanistan. We don't get to drop a couple volleys of missiles, sink a few ships, kill a few people in positions of leaderships, and just come home to celebrate a mission accomplished.

We also don't have the extendibility to pursue this degree of impact for 20 years, waiting for the right domino to stand in charge eventually.

We have been kicking the Iran can down the road for a long time. We must, and I cannot emphasize this enough... we MUST follow through and do this completely in a way that leaves nothing to chance.

Otherwise, we are creating something worse than we already have been tolerating.

Until the next time....

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@MosabHasanYOSEF Not only is this misinformation, but it is written by AI.
Gross....

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

Oh, all those buildings would be torn to pieces and practically flattened. Or at best, the concrete stripped and maybe.... maybe some steel support beams standing. Partially.
And the exterior would be either on fire, or anything non combustible would be brought to temperatures at or above what you find in industrial furnaces.
So, squished in a collapsed building, technically does shield from some things, it isn't gonna stop your body from being cooked and the combustibles in your cement buildings would all ignite.
Lots of broken glass makes me think you aren't really grasping the force and fury, nor real true size of such, in a modern nuclear detonation. We have all seen Hiroshima aftermath images and reports. That was just a fraction of the force capable of modern nuclear weapons. Current payloads are exponentially stronger even detonated in the air, which is standard, the forces will strip concrete off high-rises and snap them off in pieces before incinerating everything to rubble across a km wide area.... or some cases larger.
Nukes don't fuck around, for real.

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@JustinPetersMin Yeah and just over a century ago, engineers were saying that flying machines would be impossible for another 1 to 10 million years.

Yet I bet you flew on a plane recently, eh?

So....

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

I quote from 1903, when an engineer famously wrote an editorial in the New York Times called "Flying Machines Which Do Not Fly".

"Flying machines may be evolved by the combined and continuous efforts of mathematics and engineering over the course of 1 to 10 million years"

Folks, when someone makes declarative statements like this, just remember. History is full of such foolish things being said, often from a perspective of understanding that is incomplete or shortsighted.

[Justin Peters @JustinPetersMin]

There are no aliens. Even if there were (and there aren't) they would have no way of getting here. The distances are simply too vast. Far, far too vast.

The nearest star outside of our own sun is 4.2 light-years away. No aliens, no matter how clever, will ever be able to travel anywhere near the speed of light. The laws of physics prevent it. To accelerate any mass at all (even a pebble) to anything approaching even 1/3rd the speed of light would take incomprehensibly vast amounts of energy. You need a lot of spaceship (and I mean YUGE) to hold that much energy. So, now you've got a heck of a lot more than a pebble to move. Your energy problem just got infinitely worse.

It's impossible folks. ET ain't out there, and even if he was, he ain't dropping by for a visit.

[Paulie1776 ⓋET 🇵🇹 @SPAULIE76]

@ScienceDJX

[Eugene @ScienceDJX]

This shook me up this morning.
This is from bigoltexasfamily on TikTok.

Americans are not okay with just "moving on" from Epstein like Trump is demanding.

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

Follow this thread and the rabbit hole it exists in. You can find a rebuttal to this post on @ericweinstein profile. This interaction is so very important to observe if you consider yourself even in the slightest to be onboard the topic of science.

Science today faces a serious problem.

Weinstein is not the only academic that has publicly criticized our current scientific establishment. Nor is he the only one who finds themself facing backlash and attack on reputation. Sabine Hossenfelder @skdh recently came under attack when she published a video about the new 'bullshit science' phenomenon.

We have decades long entrenching of quaesigenetic theory. This has allowed for the broad acceptance and belief in a model that has no means of proof. It has has lead to a common practice of explaining every decoupling between prediction and observation with a particle or mass that 'must' exist.

And now those theories have people in places of power. Careers, dissertations, advisors, and entire departments that have built themselves up on work that is tied to them. Anyone proposing an alternative is challenging an institutional world view, attacking a core structure of belief. It becomes personal.

Dr. Kinney chastised Weinstein because Weinstein basically metamorphosed the irony in dark matter's existence being expressed as established fact. Dark matter and dark antimatter are both children born in quaesigenesis.

Dark matter has it made in the academic shade, unfalsifiable by nature and unchallenged by architecture. It shares the same academic privilege string theory has enjoyed for decades, a seat at the forefront of leading theory with the due date of its validity perpetually extended. They brandish an army of defenders armed and armored with the prestige and pedigree of academia, and perfectly versed in the textbook description of the theory they champion.

Meanwhile, dark matter is facing ever-increasing pressure to answer some serious questions in science. Most recent observations of observable space bring even more questions to the table. And the thing about science is, once you stop holding a theory accountable for predictions that do not align with observation, you are no longer in science, but instead a cult of fantasy opinion.

For example, JWST is giving us evidence of galaxies too massive, too structured, and too early for the standard model's timeline. If our cosmological clock is wrong, and there is genuine observational reason to think it might be, then dark matter was partly constructed to solve a structure formation problem that could itself be an artifact of incomplete physics.

We already observe stronger organization in early galactic formation that should exist. Important given dark matter's role in galactic formation. And now observation suggests the time available for organization is longer, or at the least misunderstood, which dark matter has to explain or adapt to(again).

Dark matter also predicts the existence of satellite structures in the milky way galaxy. The lack of observed subhalo structures created yet another decoupling between prediction and observation, and thus gave birth to baryonic feedback. This is simply an imagined process to explain the inadequacies of an imagined form of matter created to explain the inadequacies of the predictions of the standard model.

Yet you would be so bold as to harshly discredit an innocent assertion for explanation, then chastise Eric Weinstein's point on (generally) the elitism of science while standing on dark matter as if it is some settled science and completely misunderstanding a core point to the original assertion to begin with.

The irony here is thick.

Science is supposed to allow for the unabashed consideration of the absurd, for there often lies revelation and discovery. And science should not omit what is assumed to be absurdly suggested, while science in academia has become structured around some fairly absurd ideas itself.

[Will Kinney @WKCosmo]

Let me explain why this is a completely incoherent argument. 1/

[NoBody³³º¹ @aarostew]

@lucacarp04 @JCStatsBoi @Lethamyr_RL Not impossible.
Champ 1 is achievable with pure fundamentals.
Pure fundamentals can be learned in a month.
I am not saying it would be easy, but it can be done.

[Eric Weinstein @ericweinstein]

I’m sorry. What?