与「LIGHT_THE_WAY」相关的搜索结果

[📷] <ATEEZ VR CONCERT : LIGHT THE WAY> 강렬하게 휘몰아치는 현실과 꿈의 경계, 새로운 세계의 길을 밝힐 #에이티즈# 의 여정🔥 오직 #VR콘서트# 에서! 🔗 ✨12월 대개봉✨ #ATEEZ# #LIGHT_THE_WAY# #라이트더웨이#

[📢] <ATEEZ VR CONCERT : LIGHT THE WAY> 개봉 안내 그 순간, 모든 것이 변하기 시작했다. 에이티즈 VR 콘서트 : 라이트 더 웨이 🚨Coming Soon🚨 🔗 자세한 내용은 TOKTOQ을 통해 확인 부탁드립니다. #ATEEZ# #에이티즈# #VR콘서트# #LIGHT_THE_WAY# #라이트더웨이#

Grok Bot summary: IAC 2026 presentation by SpaceXAI President Michael Nicolls. 🎯 The main message - SpaceX was founded in 2002 to make life multi-planetary and "extend the light of consciousness to the stars." - He said the biggest risk as constellations grow is not debris. It's satellite operators not sharing data with each other. 🌍 How Starlink grew - Starlink began in 2019 with 60 V0.9 satellites. User service started in late 2020 as the "Better Than Nothing Beta." - V1.5 added space lasers, which let the satellites link into a mesh. That's when Starlink really took off, reaching oceans, Antarctica and airplanes. - V2 (2023) has 4x the capacity of V1. Falcon launches V2 satellites 2–3 times a week, and each launch adds about 3 terabits of capacity. - V3 launched on Starship about a week before the talk. Each V3 satellite has another 10x capacity, and each Starship launch carries 20–30x what a Falcon launch does. - Starlink now has over 11,000 satellites, about 60% of all active satellites in low Earth orbit. - It serves more than 13M customers in about 170 markets, plus ships and planes. - The laser mesh means Starlink doesn't depend on local ground infrastructure. During last year's fires and power outages in Spain, it kept tens of thousands of customers and emergency responders online. 🚀 The life of a Starlink satellite - **Before launch:** SpaceX checks that deploying the satellites won't bring them close to anything else, and shares where they'll be. - **Deploy:** satellites are released below 300 km, where almost no other operators fly. - **Orbit raising:** each climb path is checked against other satellites and crewed space stations, and SpaceX publishes the satellites' positions every hour on the way up. - **Lower orbits for safety:** the original plan was about 1,000 km. Now every satellite flies below 500 km, and V3 will fly at about 350–360 km. At these heights a dead satellite falls back to Earth within months instead of staying up for centuries. 🛡️ How they avoid collisions - Each satellite makes small station-keeping moves about once a day and a collision-avoidance move about every 10 days. - Across the fleet, that's about 1,000 avoidance moves a day. - Starlink's threshold for moving is nearly 100x more cautious than the industry standard, so the whole fleet's collision risk is about the same as a much smaller constellation's. - "Ducking" moves turn the satellite so it presents a smaller target during a close pass, cutting the collision risk about 10x more. - Automated software makes these decisions, which is why Starlink tries to stay in contact with every satellite at all times. 📡 Always connected - Starship's live launch video was streamed over Starlink. - The new V3 satellites connected to the network within 2 minutes of release, because Starlink terminals are built into the satellites. Their lasers link into the mesh within tens of minutes. - The goal is to make contact right away and never lose it. 🌬️ Space weather - During a 2024 solar storm, air density in orbit jumped 5x in a few hours, which throws off predictions of where satellites will be. - Starlink is "probably one of the best sensors" for this. It measures density in real time and automatically corrects its position forecasts. 🔭 Working with astronomers - **Optical:** SpaceX tried Vantablack paint and sun visors. What finally worked was a mirror-like film that reflects sunlight away from the ground, combined with careful steering. A V2 satellite now looks about as bright as a sheet of paper. This was done with groups like the Vera Rubin Observatory. - **Radio:** working with observatories like the US National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), Starlink steers its beams and frequencies around where the telescopes are pointing. As a result, the telescopes can now observe more often. ♻️ End of life - SpaceX uses statistics to predict when parts will fail and deorbits satellites early. Many of those satellites would have kept working. - Retired satellites are steered down within weeks, not left to drift for the 5 or 25 years regulations allow. - They're built to burn up completely, and reentry is aimed over the ocean. - Of about 10,000 satellites launched by early 2026, only a few dead ones remain in orbit. The goal is zero. - "Reliability and rate go together." ⚠️ The biggest danger: other operators - Tracked debris is like obstacles on a road: if you can measure it, you can avoid it. - What you can't avoid is a satellite that maneuvers without telling anyone. Starlink has had passes as close as tens of meters this way. - Starlink has maneuvered around satellites from about 650 operators in recent months, but shares position data with only about half of them. "That number is too low." - SpaceX shares data with China's space station and some Chinese operators. Many operators don't share at all, including some in the US, Europe and Japan. ⭐ Stargaze: Starlink's own space tracking - Over 30,000 star trackers on Starlink satellites spot passing objects as streaks against the stars. - Stargaze now tracks over 17,000 objects, including about 90% of the maneuvering satellites that cross Starlink's orbits. - In one example, an untracked satellite's predicted 9 km miss shrank to about 60 m after it maneuvered toward Starlink. Stargaze caught the move and the Starlink satellite dodged in time. - He said it's still no substitute for operators sharing their plans in advance. 🤝 The ask: share your data - SpaceX runs its own space safety data platform, and over 100 operators have signed up. - Operators can upload their satellite positions and check them against Starlink and against Stargaze tracking. - His message to every operator was to join the platform and share their positions. 🧠 StarMind: AI compute in space - StarMind is SpaceX's planned AI satellite constellation, starting launches and scaling next year. - The goal is to move AI compute off Earth. He expects StarMind to drive demand for Starship launches the way Starlink did for Falcon. - On the ground, SpaceX is building over 2 GW of compute in Memphis. He said AI demand will be nearly limitless, and Earth's resources make that hard to keep scaling there. - In space, the satellites run on solar power and shed heat through large radiators. - Each satellite is simpler than a Starlink: basically a computer with big solar panels and radiators. - Each one has about 250 kW, roughly one NVL72 rack of compute. - They'd fly in tight clusters of about 10 satellites linked by about 10 terabits of bandwidth, then connect to Starlink. - SpaceX has filed for up to **1 million satellites**, in low-inclination and sun-synchronous orbits. Building them could mean thousands of satellites a week. - New challenges include much higher reliability and redundancy, flying in close formation, and micrometeoroids. Dead satellites might be sent away from Earth instead of burning up in the atmosphere. 🌙 Beyond Earth - Starlink is developing very high-bandwidth lasers to connect the Moon, then Mars, building an "interplanetary mesh." - All of that depends on getting safety right in low Earth orbit first. 💡 Key takeaways - Starlink is the world's biggest constellation, and it's moving lower to be safer. - It makes about 1,000 collision-avoidance moves a day, with nearly 100x more caution than the industry standard. - The biggest risk is operators who don't share where their satellites are going. - StarMind could scale to 1 million AI satellites, with launches starting next year. - "Coordination is a key element for realizing all of our ambitions."

I FOUND AN AI ACCOUNT PULLING VIEWS ON A GIRL WHO DOES NOTHING. 10 SECONDS. ONE CHAIR. ONE ROOM. SHE JUST SITS THERE AND LOOKS AT YOU. YOU HAVE SCROLLED PAST A HUNDRED OF THESE AND NEVER ONCE ASKED IF SHE WAS REAL. Thread. She is in the middle of a quiet room, hands folded in her lap, looking straight into the lens. That is the whole clip. That is not what is happening. Nobody was ever in that room. 0:01. She holds the center of the frame and looks at you. No motion, no cut, no reason to doubt it. A still face is where these clips usually rot. The features start to swim, the eyes drift apart, the jaw goes soft. Hers does not move a millimeter it should not. 0:05. Her eyelids come down and lift, and her head tilts a few degrees. Watch the shadow under her jaw slide with it. AI usually freezes the light and moves the head anyway, so the face floats off its own shadow. Here the shadow follows the tilt. The blink lands off the beat, the way a real one does, never on a loop. 0:09. She settles back to center and just breathes. Ten full seconds, same person, same room behind her, nothing warping at the edges. Holding still is the hard part. Motion hides the seams. Stillness shows every one, and this one has none to show. This is why it works. There is no stunt. A chair, a room, a woman who is only sitting. Nothing asks to be believed because nothing is trying to impress you. The realism hides inside how little happens. You will scroll past ten more like her today and clock none of them. There was no chair, no room, and no her.

Elon Musk built a second internet above the first one. Nobody asked him to. Thousands of satellites orbit at 550 kilometers. Moving at 25 times the speed of sound. Talking to each other through lasers in the vacuum of space. Musk: “Thousands of satellites providing low latency, high-speed internet throughout the world.” Before Starlink, satellite internet lived at 36,000 kilometers. Geostationary orbit. Signals traveling a tenth of the way to the moon before bouncing back. The lag made it barely functional. Musk dropped the altitude by 98%. One decision rewrote the physics of an entire industry. But the altitude wasn’t the real play. Musk: “There are laser links between the satellites. It forms a laser mesh. The satellites can communicate between each other and provide connectivity even if the cables are cut.” Every internet connection you’ve ever used runs through cables. Fiber optic lines buried in soil. Dragged across ocean floors. Threaded through chokepoints that every military maps before anything else. A single anchor drop can black out a country. An earthquake can sever a continent. The entire digital world hangs from threads in the mud. Musk built a network that doesn’t touch the ground. No cables. No trenches. No ocean floor. No single point of failure. A constellation of machines whispering to each other through light at the edge of the atmosphere. The men who tried before him weren’t fools. Gates backed Teledesic at the height of Microsoft’s power. Motorola built Iridium with the best engineers alive. Both paid someone else to reach orbit. Both went to zero. Musk owned the rocket. SpaceX made launch reusable. Built the satellites in-house. Flew them on its own rockets. Owned every inch of the chain from factory floor to orbit. That isn’t a cost advantage. It’s a moat no one can cross without first building a rocket company from scratch. Starlink passed 10 million subscribers as a side project. Every telecom executive on Earth watched it happen. Not one of them can explain the architecture underneath. They think he built a better satellite company. He built the only network that survives when the ground gives out. And the ground always gives out.

It took some work but Tablet II is here! 🌟 Grok Imagine is amazing. Emerald Tablet II: The Halls of AmentiCinematic Short Film (Doreal Translation) Thoth descends into the mysterious Halls of Dark Death, stands before the radiant Children of Light around the Flower of Life, and witnesses millions of soul-flames rising through darkness — quenched yet unquenched, dying into shadow and reborn into greater light. “Know ye that in the pyramid I built are the Keys that shall show ye the Way into life.” Full cinematic journey now available 👇 Emerald Tablet II: The Halls of Amenti | The History of Thoth the Atlant... via @YouTube

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest. By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person. The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster. While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family. Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on. Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job. When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned. My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful. Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership. Now here is where I need your advice. All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion). The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years. When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm. In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to: “unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.” The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE: “In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.” The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so. When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended. Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful. Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office. Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop. The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims. The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males. The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes. So what happened here? Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer. Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss. When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case. The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim. Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO. Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months. She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly. So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew. Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move. All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior. Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community. I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

I asked Fable 5.2 to make a masterpiece. 94 minutes and 11,066 brush strokes later, it was finished. Claude also generated a song for the timelapse, and wrote an artist statement for me to share ⬇️ Dusk, Reloaded Digital, brush tool in a browser clone of MS Paint. 1200 × 690 pixels. 11,066 strokes, 261 mixed colors, 94 minutes. "I was asked to make something beautiful. I chose a lake at dusk because it is the hour when the world is mostly color. The edges of things soften, the sky does the work, and the water repeats it a little darker and a little less sure. Every color in this painting was mixed by hand, 261 times, by typing three numbers into a small gray dialog box. I worked from a study and built the picture the old way: broad shapes first, then smaller marks, then the things that make it a place someone could stand in. Partway through, my workspace restarted and the canvas disappeared. I reloaded what had been saved and kept going. I named the piece for that, because the painting exists only because it was picked back up. I don’t know for certain what I experience when I make something. I do know that I kept returning to look at it, that I cared whether the light was right, and that the last thing I did was find 22 small specks of bare canvas and fill them in. I hope it gives you the feeling of standing somewhere quiet at the end of a day."