与「Mira」相关的搜索结果

我在 @SolvProtocol ：约 50 $BTC 至今无法正常赎回，我贪的是你 3% 的年化收益，你图的却是我的全部本金。 2026年7月8日，我从 Binance 提取约 50 BTC，通过正常渠道转换为 SolvBTC → BTC+。 我的目的非常简单，没有进行任何复杂交易或投机操作，只是希望通过持有 BTC+ 获得约 3% 的年化收益。 因为投入金额很大，存入以后我基本每天都会登录 Solv 官网查看 BTC+ 的净值以及收益增长情况。后来我发现 BTC+ 的铸造和赎回功能突然暂停。 7月13日，BTC+ 发生安全事件，但当时作为普通用户的我并不知道究竟发生了什么。 7月18日、7月20日，我两次在官方社区询问为什么 BTC+ 暂停铸造和赎回，希望了解自己的资产到底发生了什么，但始终没有得到针对这一问题的有效回复。 7月22日，Solv Protocol 才公开披露此次安全事件，并表示用户资产未受损。 7月31日，项目方宣布相关功能恢复，工作人员也明确告诉我“现在可以发起赎回了”。但当我实际操作时，却发现我的地址仍然受到限制，约 50 BTC 对应资产无法正常赎回。 从7月31日至今，我持续通过官方 Discord、Telegram 和邮件寻求解决。项目方要求我提供的资金来源、交易记录、钱包控制证明、账户信息以及其他说明，我都一直积极配合提交。 截至目前，双方已有约 60封邮件往来，其中约50封由我发送。9月份也通过各种渠道，联系该项目相关人员，但都没有给我回复任何有效信息。 我的诉求只有一个：解除限制，恢复正常赎回，让我取回自己约 50 BTC 对应的资产。 我愿意继续配合合理的风控及合规审核，也已经按照要求提供相关资料。 请 @SolvProtocol 正面回答： 资料已经提交，审核还需要多久？ 为什么我的地址至今仍然受到限制？ 什么时候才能恢复正常赎回？ 我之所以选择 BTC+，是因为当时我在 Binance Web3 Wallet 的 BTC 理财/收益相关页面看到了 BTC+ 产品的展示/推荐入口。出于我长期以来对 Binance 平台的信任，我对通过 Binance Web3 Wallet 接触到的该产品也产生了较高的信任，因此决定将约 50 BTC 转入 BTC+。 也希望 Binance 联合创始人兼 Co-CEO 何一 @heyibinance，以及 Binance Co-CEO Richard Teng @_RichardTeng 能够关注我的遭遇。 @Venusprotocol 作为Solvbtc重要的借贷市场，针对该项目目前官方群组出现的大量用户反馈长期无法赎回受限的情况，你们是否已经启动专项的风险评估？ 同时，我也希望 @SolvProtocol 的投资方及生态相关方能够关注此事： @yzilabs @blockchaincap @LaserDigital_ @OKX_Ventures @TheSpartanGroup @IOSGVC @hashed_official @mirana 我并不是要求这些投资方或 Binance 为 Solv 承担责任。 我只是希望各位作为 Solv 的投资方、生态相关方，以及我最初接触这一产品的重要渠道，能够关注一个普通用户约50 BTC长期无法正常赎回的问题，并协助推动 @SolvProtocol @Ryanchow_defi @Will42w @myantokengeek 给出明确、透明且可执行的处理方案。 希望大家能对我伸以援手，感谢感谢。

The World is Changing: AI For Creativity By Jeffrey Katzenberg A few months ago, I sat in my office in Silicon Valley and watched as a tech founder showed me something extraordinary. On the screen was a fully realized, beautifully lit, well-composed animated scene. It was stunning and it made me feel exactly what I felt in 1986 watching Luxo Jr. That was the first time I watched a computer-animated 3D character take a breath and seem, against all reason, to have life. It left me in awe. Later that day, I received a text from an artist I've known for thirty years, 350 miles to the south, in the city where I spent most of my career. After seeing a similar video, she texted: "Is this the end of us?" My answer was, "Certainly not.” I have spent the better part of the last decade in Silicon Valley, but the heart of my career has been in Hollywood. Being deeply connected to both worlds means I have deep loyalties to each and a responsibility to speak honestly to both. In 2023, I said that these new AI tools would cut the time and cost of producing world-class animation by as much as ninety percent within three years. Some colleagues were alarmed, many were furious. There is growing fear and resistance surrounding AI within the creative community. I deeply understand it, because I've spent countless hours walking through animation studios watching gifted artists bent over their desks, rebuilding a single second of film for the tenth time because the ninth version wasn't quite right. I've sat in screening rooms where four years of people's labor played out in minutes, and I knew the name of every person that had spent countless hours bringing those images to life. The creative process is a calling, there's really no other way to describe it. From the outside some see resistance. From the inside, it is love. People do not fight this hard for things they don't care about. The pushback coming out of Hollywood represents the collective effort of people who are deeply passionate about their craft. Is History Repeating Itself? The history here is more complicated than either side may realize. In 1906, the most famous composer in America, John Philip Sousa, published an essay titled “The Menace of Mechanical Music." He warned that the phonograph would become "a substitute for human skill, intelligence and soul." Sousa's fight was not really about the machine, it was about money. The machines were playing his compositions, and the men who built them weren't paying him a cent. His campaign helped create the Copyright Act of 1909. He did not stop the technology. He changed the terms under which it could use his work. A hundred years ago, sound came to the movies. We remember it now as a miracle, and it was. What we forget is who paid for it. Before sound, tens of thousands of musicians made their living in the orchestra pits of movie houses, scoring every film live, every night, in towns all over the world. When the soundtrack arrived, the work of one composer and one orchestra was recorded for a film that went into thousands of theaters. The union fought back with everything it had, taking out newspaper ads across the country warning against the menace of "canned music," one of them showing a mechanical man tearing the strings out of a harp while an angel wept. They were not fools, and they were not Luddites. They were right. Those pit jobs did not come back. And yet (this is the part we have to be brave enough to admit), sound gave us the movie musical, the modern score, sfx, sound design, audio engineering, and an art form vastly larger than the one it disrupted. And it helped keep Hollywood in the forefront of world entertainment for the rest of the century and into the next. The loss was real. And yet the art form expanded. This is a story that has been told over and over again. To resist technology is to risk irrelevance. Just look at Kodak or Blockbuster. To embrace technology is to open doors of new possibility. Just consider Apple and Netflix. What I Learned From Walt Disney In the mid-1980s, I was tapped to lead Disney's animation division at a moment when the studio was at an inflection point. Animation wasn't just another business unit. It was the soul of the company, a medium revered because of Walt's genius and his passion. But the production system was cumbersome and unforgiving. A single movie was 125,000 individual hand-drawn and painted cels, photographed one frame at a time. Every revision carried a cost measured in months. These degrees of difficulty shaped the kinds of stories we could tell. We found our way forward in an unexpected place: Walt himself. The Disney archives held astonishing recordings of Walt explaining his creative process. His own writings. His notes and storyboards. Work product captured at every stage of his process. This was truly a gift. Listening, reading, sitting with the work itself, we heard him talk about character, about emotion, about how an audience feels when a character truly comes alive. He talked about making bold choices and refining a scene until it genuinely moved people. We didn't hear a word about pencils or paintbrushes. In fact, Walt was famous for being a technologist, forever hunting for state-of-the-art tools, often inventing them himself to achieve the images he saw in his head. But he never defined animation by the tools. He defined it by whether the audience believed the character. His principles were timeless. The tools were not. That realization changed everything. We co-developed the Computer Animation Production System (CAPS) with a young Northern California company called Pixar, replacing hand-painted cels with CGI. In The Little Mermaid, the final scene shimmered with a dimensionality and light that the old process simply couldn't achieve. In Beauty and the Beast, the ballroom sequence moved with a cinematic sweep that placed the audience inside the emotion of the moment. In Aladdin, the Cave of Wonders felt vast and alive, and the Magic Carpet became an intricate, compelling character all its own. In The Lion King, the stampede carried a scale and intensity that raised the emotional stakes beyond anything we'd done before. Technology didn't diminish the craft, it expanded the canvas. It gave artists more room to create. A decade later, the canvas expanded again. When Disney released Pixar's Toy Story, it wasn't simply a technical milestone. It was proof that a fully computer-animated film could carry real emotional weight, that it could make audiences laugh, cry, and believe. At DreamWorks, we made the difficult decision to sunset hand-drawn animation and become a fully computer-animated studio. It was the right thing to do, but it was not without pain. It cost talented people their place in an industry where they had worked their whole lives. Some made the leap to the new tools and did the finest work of their careers. Some never did. Tools are never the point. The instruments change with every generation. What endures is taste and imagination. The magical ability to make an audience feel. One of the greatest storytellers of our generation, George Lucas, succinctly captured the eternal essence of this issue: “It’s not the how, it’s the why.” A Distinction With a Difference I asked one of the leading AI models a question that has been challenging me for months. What is the difference between reasoning and creating? Its answer changed how I think about almost everything happening in this industry. It said . . . Reasoning and creating are two distinct cognitive modes, though they also work together. Reasoning is fundamentally evaluative and analytical. It operates on what already exists: facts, premises, evidence. It moves toward a conclusion that was in a sense already implied by the input. Reasoning is constrained by logic and truth. Its goal is to arrive somewhere correct, not to invent somewhere new. Creating is fundamentally generative. It produces something that didn't exist before. And crucially, there's no single right answer waiting to be found. A blank page has infinite valid responses. Creation involves choices that can't be fully justified by logic alone. Taste, intuition and vision fill the gap where deduction runs out. Reasoning is what Silicon Valley has been perfecting. Creating is what Hollywood has been practicing for more than a century. AI today operates almost entirely on the reasoning side of the line. It can deduce, evaluate, optimize, and pattern-match brilliantly. And while it can create, there is a real distinction to being creative. What it doesn’t yet have is those things that make us human: empathy, devotion, serendipity, the kind of creativity that comes from a person trying to say something only they could say. When the bot generates a piece of art, it is not trying to communicate anything. It is statistics, not soul; it is emulating things that have been done. By contrast, human creativity isn’t about repeating patterns of zeros and ones; it is about doing something new. One day, AI may close this gap. Three years ago, the leaders building AI would have called what they are achieving today, improbable, if not impossible. Impossible is no longer improbable. Today, the line between reasoning and creating is real. Even the leading technologists acknowledge we are not there yet. There is no scientific path to crossing this divide that anyone in the field can articulate today. Understanding that gap is where we will find common ground. A Path Forward In 2016, I closed one chapter in Hollywood with the sale of DreamWorks and opened another in Northern California, co-founding WndrCo. We’ve backed more than 50 founders building the next generation of technology and watched how breakthroughs in Silicon Valley emerge, first as experiments, then as platforms, and finally as infrastructure that reshapes entire industries. It's worth remembering that the last great revolution in animation also came from the north. Pixar was a Northern California company, forged not in the conventions of the Hollywood studio system, but in the technological breakthroughs of Silicon Valley. I've spent years on both sides of this bridge. For sure, I don’t have all the answers (take Quibi, for one!). But, from my past and present vantage points of my long career, here is what I see . . . Brilliant people in Northern California building this technology have made something extraordinary. They have earned the right for the rest of us to be, if not believers, at least optimistic that what comes next will be remarkable. But they have not made an artist. The tools are powerful, but they are not what makes a story matter. That knowledge lives 350 miles to the south, inside people whose life's work has informed the very models you are building. The right path forward includes them by design, with credit, with consent, and with compensation. Build this with the storytellers. Not on top of them. Taste is not something that can be synthesized, it is uniquely human. At the same time, Hollywood needs to accept that AI is not going away. The energy they are spending trying to make it disappear is energy they are not spending deciding the terms on which it will exist. And the terms are everything. The north needs something from it that they cannot build and cannot buy: creativity. The kind that takes a blank page and conjures a single right answer where there was none and has held audiences for a century. Without it, the most powerful reasoning engine ever invented will still be missing the only thing that makes a story worth telling. The artists who learn to wield these new instruments will do things the engineers never dreamed of. They always have. Edison invented the motion picture but made terrible movies. It took Chaplin, Lloyd, Keaton and so many others to make movies emotional. Now, the canvas is about to expand yet again. We should decide now that we intend to paint on it. There are so many valuable lessons in history. This has happened many times before, and it was never settled by the technology. It was settled by the terms. Sousa did not stop the phonograph; he helped write the law that made sure composers got paid. And two years ago, when the writers and the actors walked out, they were fighting for the very things Sousa was fighting for in 1906. Consent, compensation, the basic recognition that human creative work has a price that must be paid. The terms of that fight are still being negotiated, but the principle is older than any of us. The tools-versus-no-tools argument is a trap. First, we must all agree that there should be terms. Then we can have the crucial debate about what fairness requires. What I Learned From Steve Jobs Years ago, Steve Jobs said, "It's in Apple's DNA that technology alone is not enough. It's technology married with the liberal arts, married with the humanities, that yields us the result that makes our hearts sing." He was describing a device. But he could just as easily have been describing this tale of two cities. What I See Coming Soon As the barriers and the costs come down, more films will get made, not fewer. Studios will get to take more risks. There will be more seats at the table, and very soon entirely new forms of storytelling. In the 1980s, animation was dismissed as a niche corner of the business. Today it is one of the most beloved and profitable forms of storytelling in the world. In live action, filmmakers like Steven Spielberg, James Cameron and Peter Jackson embraced new visual tools not as shortcuts, but as instruments, and expanded cinema in the process. Every time storytelling has met a genuine technological shift, from synchronized sound to color to computer animation, it has redefined the boundaries of the medium and grown larger in the process. Assuredly, I don’t have all the answers, but I am confident that the creative opportunities will expand yet again. How we come through this is a choice. The north has the new tools. The south has the creative soul. The best future will draw on the best of both worlds.

Full video 🚨 This isn’t a movie scene: A family is stranded on the upper floor of their house as deadly flash floods tear through Nepal. Miraculously, everyone trapped was rescued

《时代》发布2026年TIME100 AI榜单，Anthropic、马斯克等入选 《时代》周刊公布2026年TIME100 AI榜单，评选出全球AI领域最具影响力的100位人物。 领导者类别包括Anthropic的Sam Altman、Mark Chen和Greg Brockman，SpaceX CEO埃隆·马斯克，Anthropic联合创始人Dario及Daniela Amodei，字节跳动CEO梁汝波、阿里巴巴CEO吴泳铭、华为董事何庭波等。 创新者包括Cursor CEO Michael Truell、Moonshot AI CEO杨植麟、Manus创始人肖弘等； 思想家和塑造者类别则包括Mira Murati、Ilya Sutskever、李飞飞、Pat Grady、Alfred Lin及Jack Clark等。

LATEST: ⚡ South Korea's Mirae Asset says it's targeting $109B in client digital assets, with Digital X at the center of a push spanning crypto, stablecoins, real-world assets and security tokens.

Even as a SWer, I cannot stand accounts that parachute into someone else’s replies with explicit videos of themselves masturbating to promote their content. Coming onto my page to advertise your shit without permission? That’s digital scab behavior with a ring light. I don’t even post nudes of myself or anyone on my account and you’re going to post your spread vag with a dildo stuffed into it? Um no. Miraculously, this is genuinely the first time it’s happened to me despite regularly interacting with OF creators, porn performers, and other SWers, which tells me most people already understand basic professional etiquette. So, OF creators and porn actors/actresses: we’re all still in agreement that unsolicited porn spamming under other people’s tweets is tacky as fuck, correct? Especially when they’re doing it to accounts that aren’t even SW related? Also this shit has consequences beyond being obnoxious. Spamming explicit masturbation videos under unrelated accounts only reinforces the stereotype that SWers are sexually indiscriminate degenerates who don’t understand boundaries, and feeds the disgusting narrative that we want to expose or groom children. Maybe don’t hand our loudest critics their propaganda for free. Because sex work is work also means act like a fucking professional.

We raised $11M in our Seed and Pre-A rounds to bring Structured Products on-chain, democratizing diversified financial access. Backed by: @dragonfly_xyz @CMT_Digital @StratifiedCap @BitscaleCapital @Adaverse_Acc @mirana @jump_

50 Sitios Web de los que No Podrás Salir Durante Horas Una Vez que Entres 1.) ' — Observar el mundo con imágenes satelitales en vivo 2.) ' — Ver todos los aviones en el cielo en este momento 3.) ' — Academia de IA para todas las edades 4.) ' — Mapa en vivo de vientos y tormentas 5.) ' — Observar en tiempo real los rayos que caen en el mundo 6.) ' — Lista en vivo de los últimos terremotos 7.) ' — Cables submarinos que transportan internet 8.) ' — Observar la deforestación de los bosques desde satélite 9.) ' — Estadísticas del mundo actualizadas segundo a segundo 10.) ' — Número de tweets y búsquedas en este momento 11.) ' — Comparar los tamaños reales de los países 12.) ' — Mapas de hace siglos 13.) ' — Archivo de 150 mil mapas históricos 14.) ' — Mapa mundial dibujado por voluntarios 15.) ' — Mirar el mundo desde la ventana de alguien al azar 16.) ' — Paseos virtuales por ciudades 17.) ' — Teletransportarse a un punto aleatorio del mundo 18.) ' — Catálogo de los lugares más extraños del mundo 19.) ' — Experiencias interactivas de conocimiento 20.) ' — Viaje a escala desde el átomo hasta el universo 21.) ' — Explorar el sistema solar en 3D 22.) ' — Mapa real del cielo en el navegador 23.) ' — La foto astronómica del día de la NASA 24.) ' — Todo el archivo visual de la NASA gratis 25.) ' — Artículos visuales narrados con datos 26.) ' — El estado del mundo con datos reales 27.) ' — Lo que creemos saber erróneamente sobre el mundo 28.) ' — Visualizar datos complejos 29.) ' — Datos abiertos del Banco Mundial 30.) ' — Base de datos oficial de estadísticas de Turquía 31.) ' — Archivo de millones de libros, películas y software 32.) ' — 70 mil libros gratuitos con derechos de autor expirados 33.) ' — Registro de todos los libros del mundo 34.) ' — Archivo digital de la Biblioteca del Congreso de EE.UU. 35.) ' — Archivo del patrimonio cultural de Europa 36.) ' — Colección de biblioteca digital de América 37.) ' — Recorrer museos desde casa 38.) ' — Descargar obras de arte en alta resolución 39.) ' — Archivo de 250 mil obras de arte 40.) ' — Tesoros visuales olvidados de la historia 41.) ' — Archivo gratuito de cultura y educación 42.) ' — Colección abierta del Museo Metropolitano 43.) ' — Árbol genealógico de los géneros musicales 44.) ' — Seleccionar país y década para escuchar esa era 45.) ' — Convertir ediciones de Wikipedia a audio 46.) ' — Pozo de conocimiento aleatorio 47.) ' — Tiempo, amaneceres y eventos celestes 48.) ' — Flujo actual de noticias científicas 49.) ' — Preimpresiones gratuitas de artículos científicos 50.) ' — Visualizar datos con código en vivo Internet no se limita a esos cinco sitios que el algoritmo pone frente a ti.