hot person: wow everyone here is so nice

walking out of the holmes documentary

What do you even stand for? Who are you, Bagel Bites?

nominative determinism strikes again

market for lemons

Sherlock Holmes’ daughter btw

foreigners seeing this tweet

btw GTA 6 is going to cause a widespread mental hibernation and when people put it down and wake up the world will beyond the point of no return haha

Excuse me are you suggesting I marry a labrador

Co-directors Nathan and Lance themselves couldn't agree on what was going on during shooting. “It wasn’t until we started shooting that moments would happen--some of them are in the film--and then after Lance and I would talk about what we thought happened there. We’d completely disagree on what something meant to us and what we thought was happening. Then we were like, ‘Oh, this is really interesting. If we can’t agree on what’s happening, there’s something here.’ And our curiosity sort of just like drove us from there.”

They should invent a retirement account that lets you contribute money you have already paid taxes on, invest that money so it grows tax-free, and make tax-free withdrawals later in retirement

"Why are the protesters being allowed to destroy historic monuments?" The French after protesters have destroyed historic monuments:

“3 likes isn’t a lot” imagine the one god existing in three distinct persons

SF bro: of course I knew she was lying the whole time, I could easily recognize it because she’s exactly like my boss and my manager and my work peers and myself

When she was stirring those eggs I was filled with such enmity and contempt. What did she think she was doing??? Who does she thinks she is?? Won't SOMEONE please take those eggs from her And then the angel Billy swooped in, and all was right with the world

[NO SPOILERS] You Can See Everything is indeed one of the best films I’ve ever seen. the artistic direction was incredible, but the social dynamics on display were by far the more interesting and important part to me as someone who has worked in startups with extreme narcissist founder types, I have seen the Holmes-style intense charisma first hand and it is indeed terrifying and eclectic and seductive and beautiful I remember when I first joined the startup, it was myself and the two co founders. the CEO had what me and his co founder referred to as a “reality distortion field” when you are with people like that and they focus their laser-like attention on you, things open up. possibilities that felt impossible all of the sudden seem incredibly easy and indeed almost inevitable what’s fascinating is even once you start to understand this strange power and fear it, you’re still stuck in its grip. the film gives an incredible portrayal of this strange phenomenon from extremely close up what people need to realize is that the entire venture capital tech startup ecosystem is geared towards finding and/or creating this type of insane charisma in people, then harnessing them in order to make money I saw the seeds of this power in the CEO founder of the startup I was at, and then every time he would visit Silicon Valley for a funding meeting or a founder workshop/conference, it would have grown. sometimes to a terrifying degree I’m not sure what kind of things go on out there, but it’s absolutely amazing and terrifying and something that I think it’s quite hard to understand until you experience it yourself that is, until now. I suspect Nathan Fielder’s movie will be regarded as a timeless masterpiece because it captures such an extreme and outlier human psychological phenomenon that currently rules and dictates much of our current power structures perhaps it always has? either way, if you haven’t seen the film, you absolutely must. regardless of whether you care about the whole Theranos saga or Holmes in particular, it’s an incredible insight into the dynamics of Silicon Valley, the place where strange eldritch magicks are being unleashed which will soon control the world, if indeed that isn’t already the case

My first thought after leaving the theatre was "I hope Nathan Fielder lives forever"

If there's one thing we can all agree on it's that she was doing a terrible job stirring those eggs

I just got out of the theatre after seeing 'You Can See Everything', the Elizabeth Holmes and Billy Evans documentary. I include Billy because the film is just as much about him as it is about her. This review contains spoilers Here are my thoughts Early in the film Nathan asks Billy if at any time he felt that he had been manipulated into being in a relationship with Elizabeth because his family has money. By the movie's end, Amanda Seyfried describes Elizabeth as suffering from 'Stockholm Syndrome' as if she is the one being manipulated Nathan, having spent much time with Elizabeth and Billy, admits that he never noticed any fear from Elizabeth, and she never seemed to feel coerced. He explains that what she seems to feel for Billy is simply love. This is wild to Amanda, because from what she has seen from the movie, she has her mind made up that Billy is a controlling narcissist and Elizabeth is his victim. The question at the center of the movie is whether Elizabeth is genuine, or whether she is in fact a master manipulator. In a way, the audience is reenacting the part of the jury, but this time her character is at the center of the trial. This is Elizabeth's whole drive for spending her last precious days of freedom surrounded by a movie crew, she wants the public to see her for who she is. When the trailer was released, Billy said that it made Elizabeth 'seem crazy' but, despite the film portraying him as controlling and a bit of a bully, he seems fully supportive of it, telling audiences to "make up your own mind" The film, probably not by design, makes it quite difficult to tell whether Elizabeth is being intentionally abstruse, or whether she is, as Billy says, "just weird." This frustrates Nathan throughout the entire film, whose worst fear is to be duped, and you can see him jumping out of his skin any time he thinks he's getting an answer, only to moments later find himself kicking dirt. So which is it? Is there a hidden Elizabeth Holmes behind the scenes conniving with her husband? Or did we really see everything? I believe the key to that answer is in that little disagreement between Amanda and Nathan. Nathan's genuine impression is that Elizabeth experiences pure love, to the point that we can believe that she never has to lie or hide anything from Billy, and that he too can be honest with her (of course he hides things from her, but as the movie establishes, this is not dishonest since she agrees to it). They are two strange people that seem to have found the perfect connection. No matter how good of an actor someone is, being in social situations with your husband every day at this extremely stressful and sensitive time, there would be micro-expressions, physical pauses, SOMETHING in the face of Billy's controlling nature. She would either shrink from him or prickle or SOMETHING, but she simply expresses love. That Elizabeth is so uncritical of Billy rhymes with this weirdness. She doesn't fully interpret his aggression, she doesn't fully get how others would understand the comedy bit "Who's on first?" she doesn't understand how others interpret "this device can do all of these things". A cynical person can imagine an Elizabeth that pretends through this movie while holding a hidden agenda. Not only would living like that be really really hard, I think anyone doing it would accidentally create many more situations that were questionable. If she was pretending I think there would be some tell that she was a manipulative person, some moment of calculation. Maybe she could do it for an hour, or a day, but to do it every day under constant scrutiny without a single trip up is unbelievable. All of her behavior, the way she reacts to other people, is in line with her being weird, not manipulative. Yes she has sanpaku eyes and gets hyper-focused during conversations, I've seen the same thing from ladies at church, but that alone does not a sociopath make.