BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis) header
BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis) profile picture

🟦 A lapis lazuli block is a decorative mineral block that is crafted from 9 pieces of lapis lazuli. 🇺🇸 Owner of @MrBeast_Stats and @Beast1Billion.

United States
Joined June 2017
Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)Photo by BlockOfLapis (@BlockOfLapis)
BlockOfLapis retweeted
One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was "composition"—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up. So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we're going to shock the world? "No," he told me. "We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us." Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026. There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true. But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone. Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were: 1) End the war 2) Focus on cost of living/inflation 3) Put America First 4) Change our relationship to Israel Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.) In the next few months, there's going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I'm open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you. The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night. If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest. But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there. I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.
69,499
30,814
21,228
284,837
73,138,912
BlockOfLapis retweeted
who still remembers the pewdiepie vs. t-series live streams?
5
5
35
1,034
Yesterday @SenBooker and @SenJohnKennedy launched the Senate Creators Caucus! 🏛️✨ @YouTubeCreators joined a panel moderated by @dylanewells to talk about what it actually takes to run a creator-led business and how policymakers can support and protect creators. Digital entrepreneurs are creating jobs and investing in their local communities, and we applaud the expanding bipartisan leadership recognizing the creator economy in Washington.
11
10
1
33
37,938
BlockOfLapis retweeted
Firefighters at the World Trade Center site raise an American flag over the rubble for the first time. Photographer Thomas E. Franklin captures the dramatic moment.
87
2,585
133
30,924
712,263
2,572
8,677
2,716
88,936
8,733,632
BlockOfLapis retweeted
The new YouTube views change is resulting in people seeing an increase in views ranging from 20% on the lower end to nearly 100% on the higher end. I haven't found a pattern based on channel size.
21
4
1
124
14,639
BlockOfLapis retweeted
Subscribe. To. PewDiePie.
1
1
1
9
819
BlockOfLapis retweeted
3
7
182
BlockOfLapis retweeted
Youtube is so disingenuous about changes they make. Always pretending it's cos they just care so much about the lil creators The reason they give here is utter bullshit and not even internally consistent. So now, scrolling instantly past an unwanted autoplayed video is a "view"
Starting 8/24, views will count the moment a video begins to play (w/ no minimum watch time) across all formats (VOD, Shorts, & Live). We’re standardizing views to reflect creators’ true exposure across YouTube, making it easier to show their value to brand partners. This update won't impact creator earnings or YPP eligibility. Details: goo.gle/4gkNM1e
19
147
1
1,587
25,316
BlockOfLapis retweeted
I don’t like this change. YouTube view counts are the only view counts that mean anything.
Starting 8/24, views will count the moment a video begins to play (w/ no minimum watch time) across all formats (VOD, Shorts, & Live). We’re standardizing views to reflect creators’ true exposure across YouTube, making it easier to show their value to brand partners. This update won't impact creator earnings or YPP eligibility. Details: goo.gle/4gkNM1e
60
33
2
2,557
267,387
HAPPY 250TH 4TH OF JULY! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
1
1
10
2,401
BlockOfLapis retweeted
Continental Congress HAS SIGNED A DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE!  The UNITED STATES are OFFICIALLY INDEPENDENT from BRITAIN. LIBERTY BELLS ring out throughout Philadelphia; the streets ERUPT IN ECSTASY.
547
10,775
748
69,061
2,973,466
On this day 250 years ago, roughly 50 men voted to approve what is arguably the most important document of the past 250 years, and perhaps the next 250 years: The Declaration of Independence. It formalized the birth of the newly created United States of America. By the time the final draft was approved, more than 1,000 Americans had already given their lives for a nation they would never see. This nation has known the bad, the sad, the tragic, and the horrific. It has also known the good, the joyful, the fortunate, and the extraordinary. Generation after generation, Americans have carried a spirit of doing the impossible. From business to science, from war to culture, and through the achievements of countless individuals, Americans have been revolutionary from the very beginning. Some say empires last, on average, 250 years. Well, they clearly have never seen America before. This is our nation. This is our Manifest Destiny. Celebrate the 250th today. Celebrate this great nation every day. As an American, you have a remarkable inheritance.
23
114
2,221
Do you remember when you joined X? I do! #MyXAnniversary
1
2
584
BlockOfLapis retweeted
WE HIT HALF A BILLION SUBSCRIBERS ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
7,015
5,517
1,452
140,954
18,702,631
誕生日おめでとうございます✨
13
55
6
614
20,678
BlockOfLapis retweeted
Today, we remember a legend. On this day in history, Harambe would have celebrated another birthday. An icon that became part of internet history, American culture, and an entire generation’s timeline. Tomorrow marks 10 years since we lost him. Ten years since the moment the world stopped scrolling and collectively mourned something bigger than a meme. He became a symbol of loyalty, strength, chaos, unity, and the strange beauty of the internet bringing millions of people together for one cause: never forgetting Harambe. Everyone remembers where they were when they heard the news. And somehow, a decade later, his legacy still lives on. Gone, but never forgotten. Rest easy to a true patriot. 🕊️🇺🇸 May 27, 1999 — May 28, 2016 Forever in our hearts.
6,381
19,913
7,038
149,864
24,293,664
BlockOfLapis retweeted
EARTHSET. April 6, 2026. Humanity, from the other side. First photo from the far side of the Moon. Captured from Orion as Earth dips beyond the lunar horizon. Photo: NASA
2,619
16,650
1,888
95,886
5,627,285
BlockOfLapis retweeted
⚠️IMPORTANT READ: If YouTube doesn’t solve its AI problem quickly, we won’t have many human creators left. (+ research insights) If you’re wondering why it feels like you’re seeing more AI content, and why human creators seem to be disappearing, here are the numbers from a real study by Goldberg and Lam. They analyzed what happened to the stock image market after generative AI was introduced. I’ve added an image showing what the data looked like month by month. Every single month after AI entered the market, 1 in 4 creators exited because the economics stopped working for them. Now, it wasn’t bad for everyone. Total consumption on the platform went up by 39% per month. But sales of human-made content dropped every month. The platform won. The buyers won. The human creators… didn’t. Think about what that would look like on YouTube. AI can already generate scripts, voiceovers, thumbnails, talking-head videos, and entire channels at a fraction of the cost and time it takes a human creator to produce a single video. The algorithm doesn’t care whether a video was made by a person who spent three days filming and editing or by a system that generated it in 20 minutes. This isn’t about being anti-AI. AI helps a lot of creators improve their output. But it is about protecting the type of content people actually want to watch. And I’m not just talking about removing AI slop. I’m talking about making sure human-driven channels are protected and prioritized over AI-driven content. The stock image market already ran the experiment that YouTube hasn’t fully felt yet. Don't ignore that. Here’s my ask to one person: @nealmohan I know you’ve seen some of my work (algorithm, platform changes, etc). I respect what you’re doing for the platform, but this is your moment to stand for human creators. It’s time to put public effort into protecting them. Not just AI labeling or low-lift solutions, they don't solve the problem in a meaningful way. No, we need a genuine, real, and public effort to preserve what YouTube was built on. You’re one of the few people in a position to set a precedent for every platform. Let’s talk. For those interested in the actual research, check out Samuel G. Goldberg and H. Tai Lam's paper called "Generative AI In Equilibrium: Evidence From A Creative Goods Marketplace"
58
60
15
402
67,242
BlockOfLapis retweeted
🚨Important reminder: The YouTube algorithm actually changed, for the worse. (+Data) I’ve addressed this last year already and because we haven’t seen it being addressed, I thought it’d be a good idea to remind everyone of what happened last year. Before I begin, a direct note to all my friends at YouTube, I truly respect what you’ve been doing in the past year, and I know you’ll take this problem seriously, but urgency is key when creators are hurting. Let’s begin. Last year, creators of all sizes started noticing a significant change in the overall performance of their channels. Usually this is related to the overall behavior of audiences, however, this one felt different. It wasn’t just one or two channels, it was every single channel I was working on (and more). These are channels that pull 100 million to 1 billion views per month at times. At first, I was like: alright, let’s find out where we’re going wrong. Maybe we’re missing something. However, after weeks and months, no answers were found. This is very frustrating, not only for myself but also for the creators who are relying on these answers to maintain their channel, business and livelihood. But that’s when we made a breakthrough, a way of looking at data that we had missed. You see, this entire time we were analyzing the channel as a whole, new and old videos combined. However, we weren’t focused on isolating older content, specifically content with a publish date older than one month. That’s where, for the first time, we noticed something unusual. We saw a complete crash in short form views on content older than one month. (see image) What we found was that somewhere in the middle of September last year, YouTube had pushed a significant change in their short form algorithm which impacted nearly every short form creator across the platform. Why is this a problem? Because it affects every creator we all care about. It didn’t matter if you were a smaller creator or one of the top ten creators, we haven’t found many people who were spared. I’ll leave a brief explanation at the bottom so you can check your own channel. And these weren’t just entertainment or educational creators, it was both. What we found is that YouTube seems to have implemented a change that strongly prioritizes content uploaded in the last month, roughly 28 to 30 days, we’re still unsure. But what impact does this have, and why do I believe this is something that should be brought to light? The first impact is that we’re seeing a shift away from quality to quantity. Often, creators live off the revenue generated, not just Adsense, from these bigger content pieces. A strong portion of this revenue comes from their back catalog, meaning older content. With this change, you’re increasing the importance of high volume uploads in the first 30 days. What do I believe is happening, and why is this change going through? I believe there are two reasons why YouTube is pushing this change. First, to hit certain targets with Shorts. Plain simple, I don’t believe this is a “what’s best for the creator” type of play, it feels more like a “we want to compete with TikTok” type of play. Not unreasonable, even if the creator gets hurt by it short term. I’m just trying to think from a corporate point of view. The second reason, which I believe to be the actual leading reason, is a push for recency, freshness or novelty, whichever term they would choose to use. But if this is the reason, there’s a massive overcorrection happening. Some content needs that freshness: news, streaming highlights, medical information. However, this isn’t true for all types of content. Some content from years ago is just as good today. We have noticed that certain top content pieces, individual videos, still get a significant amount of views, so it looks more like prioritization than anything else. Regardless, while in private I find it fun to refer to this situation as “the flattening”, in reality this is a very concerning moment where simple ideas turn into a massive hit toward the creator economy. And this is just the tip of the iceberg of changes that have been affecting people. It’s important that changes on the platform aren’t just focused on the consumer, but the preservation of a healthy creator economy that allows creators to grow their business, teams, and create better content. Without a focus on both the creator and the consumer, you’ll quickly run into an issue of low quality slop that makes people want to go elsewhere. If there’s any call to action here for you, whether you’re a creator or a viewer, I strongly encourage you to leave your thoughts here to encourage YouTube to rethink this decision, or at least optimize it so that it’s also regarding the importance of keeping a healthy creator economy. Share your thoughts, and even data from your own channel, because this will be seen by people who have the power to make change. Disclaimer: I’ve left out some sensitive information. However, if you want to check this for yourself, go to Analytics, click on Advanced Mode, filter by Content Type (Shorts), filter by Publish Date (for example any short published from Jan 2025 to Jun 2025), set the data to Last 365 Days and take a look at the change happening around September last year. I think you can imagine why it took so long for us to find out where the issue began.
44
27
3
317
48,571