Russia has attacked 4 Turkish ships over the past 48 hours.
3 of the ships were hit by Russian suicide drones in the port of Odesa yesterday while 1 ship was hit by a Russian drone out at open sea.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
3 of the ships were hit by Russian suicide drones in the port of Odesa yesterday while 1 ship was hit by a Russian drone out at open sea.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🔥1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Just a European countries are starting their attempts to rebuild their defense industries in order to help Ukraine and build their own deterrence against Russian aggression, Greta Thunberg & her far-left Italian friends launch a campaign to shut down military production in Europe
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
😁1🕊1
THE CRYPTO MARKET ISN’T UNDERPERFORMING DUE TO LACK OF LIQUIDITY.
It’s underperformance because no one knows what comes next.
- Liquidity is improving; QT is over.
- The Fed has started adding liquidity again.
- The US Treasury is pushing cash back into markets through buybacks and TGA flows.
- China and Canada are easing.
- Global liquidity is moving back toward ATH
And yet, Bitcoin isn't moving.
Altcoins are performing even worse.
This shows the problem isn’t liquidity; it’s uncertainty, and the market hates uncertainty.
In past cycles, crypto performed well even during tightening, as long as the macro path was clear.
In 2020-2021, the Fed’s stance was simple: Ongoing easing.
Liquidity was coming, and everyone knew it.
Bitcoin pumped hard.
In 2023, the Fed was hiking rates, yet BTC rallied.
Why?
Because the path was clear.
Rates would rise until inflation cooled.
But now the situation is different.
The Fed itself is divided.
Some members want more cuts.
Some want to pause.
Some believe inflation is finished.
Others think its full impact hasn’t even shown up yet.
Global policy is also unclear.
Markets don’t know how far or how fast the Bank of Japan may tighten.
Apart from that, trade war and geopolitical war situations are adding more uncertainty.
Because there's no clear macro direction about what is coming next, risk-on assets like BTC and alts are struggling to perform.
This is also a reason why every Bitcoin pump often retraces quickly and altcoins underperform even when liquidity data looks positive.
IMO, this uncertainty phase likely lasts until around Q2 2026, when a new Fed Chair appointed by Trump is expected to take over, alongside more aligned leadership.
Once that happens, the policy becomes clearer:
when to cut, how much to cut, and how much liquidity to inject.
This is when I'll probably start allocating heavily back into the markets again.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
It’s underperformance because no one knows what comes next.
- Liquidity is improving; QT is over.
- The Fed has started adding liquidity again.
- The US Treasury is pushing cash back into markets through buybacks and TGA flows.
- China and Canada are easing.
- Global liquidity is moving back toward ATH
And yet, Bitcoin isn't moving.
Altcoins are performing even worse.
This shows the problem isn’t liquidity; it’s uncertainty, and the market hates uncertainty.
In past cycles, crypto performed well even during tightening, as long as the macro path was clear.
In 2020-2021, the Fed’s stance was simple: Ongoing easing.
Liquidity was coming, and everyone knew it.
Bitcoin pumped hard.
In 2023, the Fed was hiking rates, yet BTC rallied.
Why?
Because the path was clear.
Rates would rise until inflation cooled.
But now the situation is different.
The Fed itself is divided.
Some members want more cuts.
Some want to pause.
Some believe inflation is finished.
Others think its full impact hasn’t even shown up yet.
Global policy is also unclear.
Markets don’t know how far or how fast the Bank of Japan may tighten.
Apart from that, trade war and geopolitical war situations are adding more uncertainty.
Because there's no clear macro direction about what is coming next, risk-on assets like BTC and alts are struggling to perform.
This is also a reason why every Bitcoin pump often retraces quickly and altcoins underperform even when liquidity data looks positive.
IMO, this uncertainty phase likely lasts until around Q2 2026, when a new Fed Chair appointed by Trump is expected to take over, alongside more aligned leadership.
Once that happens, the policy becomes clearer:
when to cut, how much to cut, and how much liquidity to inject.
This is when I'll probably start allocating heavily back into the markets again.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Indian guy took a carpet from the stadium … due to the anger for paying $100 to see messi for 20 minutes
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🌚5😢2
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Be careful when you use these credit card readers at gas stations! A lot of scammers out there!!
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🤯4🌚1
The British Medical Journal's Journal of Medical Ethics has published a defense of female genital mutilation.
After reading their case, I'm not sold.
I still think we should ban female genital mutilation.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
After reading their case, I'm not sold.
I still think we should ban female genital mutilation.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🌚4👍2💯1
What if I told you that the "successful" psychopath in your office isn't actually motivated by money, fame, or success?
I just read a fascinating 2021 paper that completely reframes why psychopaths rise to leadership.
The truth is much darker.
Here is the psychology of the "Need for Domination"
Research estimates that psychopaths are 4x more likely to be found in high-profile leadership positions than in the general population.
But why? And how do they get there without getting caught?
2/ We usually picture psychopaths as impulsive criminals (the "prison profile").
But the paper by Palmen, Kolthoff, & Derksen identifies a different breed:
The "Controlled Primary Psychopath."
These people have the same lack of empathy, but they have one superpower: High Self-Control.
3/ This self-control acts as a "moderator."
It allows them to suppress the impulsive, antisocial behavior that usually lands psychopaths in jail.
Instead of punching someone, they use "functional impulsivity" and charm to climb the corporate ladder.
But here is where it gets weird.
4/ We assume these leaders want what we want: Money. Prestige. Achievement.
The researchers argue: No.
While Narcissists crave "Achievement" (to be admired) and "Affiliation" (to be loved), Psychopaths score LOW on both.
They don't care if the company succeeds.
5/ So what drives them?
The paper proposes a specific, intrinsic motivation: The Need for Domination.
For the psychopathic leader, power isn't a means to an end. Power is the end.
They are biologically wired by the "Dominance Behavioral System" to seek control over others.
6/ This distinction is crucial.
A Narcissist might work 80 hours a week because they want the glory of a successful product.
A Psychopath doesn't care about the product. They care about the hierarchy. They want to be the one pulling the strings.
7/ The study highlights a chilling detail about their view on resources (money/perks).
Psychopaths prefer "relative" success over "absolute" success.
They would rather have less total money, as long as they still have more than you.
It’s not about comfort; it’s about superiority.
8/ This explains why "successful" psychopathic leaders are actually terrible for business.
Because they lack the "Need for Achievement," they rarely work for the collective good.
They are parasitic. They use the organization's assets solely to increase their dominance over employees.
9/ The paper warns that this specific profile—High Dominance + Low Affiliation + Low Achievement—is a recipe for disaster.
It leads to:
Fraud
Toxic cultures
Employee burnout
They are "successful" at getting the job, but destructive once they have it.
10/ The Takeaway:
When you see a leader who is charming but creates chaos, ask yourself:
Are they trying to build something? Or are they just trying to own you?
If they seem to value control more than profit or people, you might be looking at a Controlled Primary Psychopath.
It fundamentally changed how I view corporate power dynamics.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
I just read a fascinating 2021 paper that completely reframes why psychopaths rise to leadership.
The truth is much darker.
Here is the psychology of the "Need for Domination"
Research estimates that psychopaths are 4x more likely to be found in high-profile leadership positions than in the general population.
But why? And how do they get there without getting caught?
2/ We usually picture psychopaths as impulsive criminals (the "prison profile").
But the paper by Palmen, Kolthoff, & Derksen identifies a different breed:
The "Controlled Primary Psychopath."
These people have the same lack of empathy, but they have one superpower: High Self-Control.
3/ This self-control acts as a "moderator."
It allows them to suppress the impulsive, antisocial behavior that usually lands psychopaths in jail.
Instead of punching someone, they use "functional impulsivity" and charm to climb the corporate ladder.
But here is where it gets weird.
4/ We assume these leaders want what we want: Money. Prestige. Achievement.
The researchers argue: No.
While Narcissists crave "Achievement" (to be admired) and "Affiliation" (to be loved), Psychopaths score LOW on both.
They don't care if the company succeeds.
5/ So what drives them?
The paper proposes a specific, intrinsic motivation: The Need for Domination.
For the psychopathic leader, power isn't a means to an end. Power is the end.
They are biologically wired by the "Dominance Behavioral System" to seek control over others.
6/ This distinction is crucial.
A Narcissist might work 80 hours a week because they want the glory of a successful product.
A Psychopath doesn't care about the product. They care about the hierarchy. They want to be the one pulling the strings.
7/ The study highlights a chilling detail about their view on resources (money/perks).
Psychopaths prefer "relative" success over "absolute" success.
They would rather have less total money, as long as they still have more than you.
It’s not about comfort; it’s about superiority.
8/ This explains why "successful" psychopathic leaders are actually terrible for business.
Because they lack the "Need for Achievement," they rarely work for the collective good.
They are parasitic. They use the organization's assets solely to increase their dominance over employees.
9/ The paper warns that this specific profile—High Dominance + Low Affiliation + Low Achievement—is a recipe for disaster.
It leads to:
Fraud
Toxic cultures
Employee burnout
They are "successful" at getting the job, but destructive once they have it.
10/ The Takeaway:
When you see a leader who is charming but creates chaos, ask yourself:
Are they trying to build something? Or are they just trying to own you?
If they seem to value control more than profit or people, you might be looking at a Controlled Primary Psychopath.
It fundamentally changed how I view corporate power dynamics.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
✍4🤯1💯1👀1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Quick sand is real. A Utah hiker had a real-life quicksand scare at Arches National Park, prompting a dramatic hours-long rescue in freezing conditions
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🙏2😨2🔥1
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
In China, you can buy a fake coffee at a fake Starbucks while wearing your fake Armani jacket while riding on your fake Honda motorcycle.
China doesn't care about copyright. Everything is fake.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
China doesn't care about copyright. Everything is fake.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
😁8💯2
Why are weed users so often losers?
It's not because of the weed. It's because of selection.
Losers choose to smoke weed, and in causal designs the apparent harms evaporate.
Consider this twin control:
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
It's not because of the weed. It's because of selection.
Losers choose to smoke weed, and in causal designs the apparent harms evaporate.
Consider this twin control:
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
👀4💯1🫡1
One of the arguments this article presents in favor of female genital mutilation is that it's OK because the people doing the cutting are usually also women
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
😱2😐2