Here for no-spin thoughts on news & real impact on us. Travel/outdoors/photo/food lover sharing pics, tips & seeking ways to cut pounds. Tech reviews & insights
Joined September 2024
- Tweets5.8K
- Following4.2K
- Followers3.6K
- Likes1.4K
Pinned Tweet
Elon, I always admired you until now. I think it would be good for you to end this tweet series ASAP before it becomes impossible to dig yourself out of this mess. Indians were with you thus far, but now you might have triggered an event that will turn them against you. If it was your advisors who made you do this, start by firing them!
Now let’s get into the details :
The claim that Starlink still has “no license” after years of compliance is not accurate. The company received its GMPCS licence in June 2025 and IN-SPACe authorisation in July 2025. What remains is the Ministry of Home Affairs security assessment—covering Indian gateways, data localisation, lawful interception and the ability to restrict service in sensitive areas—and that same assessment is also pending for Reliance’s Jio Satellite and Bharti-backed OneWeb. All three licensed operators are at broadly the same stage.
Framing the delay as Ambani acting as “real boss” or “Prime Minister,” and dismissing Indian pushback as an “army of shills,” therefore misstates the process and has been widely received as an attack on sovereignty rather than a serious regulatory argument.
For Americans and Musk supporters, this public campaign was unnecessary and has likely made Starlink’s position harder, not easier. India already has some of the world’s cheapest mobile data, produced by real competition between Jio and Airtel. Starlink’s commercial case in that market depends on clearing the same security rules as the other licensees and then offering a price people will actually pay.
Aggressive personal attacks and inaccurate licence claims have alienated many Indians who were otherwise open to more options in underserved areas. Every major country protects critical communications infrastructure on national-security grounds—the United States does so with Chinese firms, and China does so with Starlink itself. Selective outrage undermines the case for open markets.
Indians are right to be frustrated by the tone and the implication that their government is simply an oligarch’s instrument. Security rules exist for documented reasons and apply equally; they are not a personal favour to any one company.
At the same time, fixed-broadband penetration remains low and large parts of the country still lack reliable connectivity. If Starlink or any other operator completes the security reviews that already cover all three licensees and then competes on price and performance, allowing that competition is in users’ interest. The process should stay rule-based rather than driven by public insults or political pressure.
The practical path is straightforward: complete the outstanding security assessments on equal terms, assign spectrum fairly, and let the market decide. Misstatements about licences and personalised attacks have only made that outcome more difficult for everyone.
The ridiculous arguments by Ambani’s army of Internet shills make no sense
On the one hand, they say Starlink couldn’t possibly compete with the amazing low prices offered by Ambani’s de facto monopoly in India and then, in the same breath, they essentially claim that Starlink would be too strong of a competitor! This is absurd hypocrisy and hyperbole.
The reality is that competition would greatly benefit the average citizen in India by giving them more choices, as it always does. Ambani’s profits will be lower, but he is not going out of business. And, obviously, if Starlink is too expensive in India, no one will buy it, so SpaceX will need to make pricing affordable.
Pay attention to what Elon Musk is saying—he’s making a high-stakes case for why you should set aside smaller concerns and vote Republican for the Senate this year, or risk a permanent one-party state after 2028 that puts the country in a hole hard to dig out of.
Think like voting Democrat is voting to turn US into Venezuela under Hugo Chávez: Court expansion and other institutional changes helped convert electoral victories into longer-term control that proved very difficult for the opposition to reverse, sliding into competitive authoritarianism.
Add to the above uncontrolled immigration (Dems Open Borders policy) and you have the recipe to turn US into France.
Above combination is a hole which is impossible to dig out of!
My biggest concern is that if there is a clean sweep by Democrats of the House, Senate and Presidency in 2028, they will:
1. Make DC and Puerto Rico states to gain a strong majority in the Senate.
2. Open the borders and legalize everyone living in America illegally to cement a permanent majority.
3. Increase the size of the Supreme Court to gain an immediate majority.
This would result in America becoming a permanent one-party state and the end of democracy in any meaningful sense of the word.
All that is needed to ensure this doesn’t happen is 51 Republican senators in 2029. That is why you should vote for Republican senators this election. Other reasons are irrelevant compared to this one.
Hilarious… Front-row liberal just got a free trial of what the rest of us feel every day at office. 😂
Norah O’Donnell thought reading a failed assassin’s manifesto was a tough question — until Trump called her a disgrace and told her she should be ashamed for putting that filth on 60 Minutes 🔥
If democrats get power back they’ll go right back to treating free speech as optional, pressuring companies to silence people, and redefining “disinformation” so it covers ordinary disagreement.
We’ve already seen how that plays out.
Americans should want India to hit ~$10T GDP and field a real nuclear triad + hypersonic capability. A stronger India is the best long-term check on China in the Indo-Pacific—independent, democratic, and able to hold its own without becoming anyone’s junior partner.
That is squarely in U.S. interest. What is not: leftist globalist funding networks (Soros-style Open Society groups and allies) backing color-revolution tactics, NGO campaigns, and narrative warfare aimed at destabilizing India’s government and social cohesion. The same playbook used elsewhere has produced chaos, not reliable partners.
A decisive, sovereign India that succeeds on its own terms beats a fragmented or externally pressured one. Helping India build capacity and stay stable serves American power far better than trying to remake it from outside.
@POTUS @JDVance @narendramodi
📢'I have a simple proposition in this essay. India’s toughest decade since the one that preceded its independence from colonial rule in 1947 is upon us. There is a very simple way to understand this. If this decade goes well, India will hit approximately $10 trillion (US dollars) in GDP and increase per capita income to $5-6,000. It will do this while expanding one of the largest militaries in the world with both nuclear weapons (a fully functional and growing triad), ability to conduct space warfare (anti-satellite capability) and with elite weaponry like supersonic and hypersonic missiles. Once this point is reached, India will become a near peer competitor of China and attain the ambition and goal of becoming a near peer competitor of the United States.
No matter how many times it asserts and demonstrates its peaceful rise, at these levels of economic and military development, this would lead to the biggest reworking of the world order since at least the late 18th century. This gets more interesting in PPP (purchasing power parity terms)—by approximately 2040, give or take a couple of years, India and China together will clearly outweigh the US and Europe combined in purchasing-power terms. In market-dollar terms, India alone will be approaching the size of the eurozone’s core economies, though the West’s dollar lead will persist well beyond 2040.'
LINK - sundayguardianlive.com/edito…
Regular AI users and investors just got a clear warning about what’s coming.
Everyday users should expect fewer new models, slower feature drops, and higher prices as compute gets hoarded by a few big players.
Investors in pure AI startups and infrastructure are staring at a brutal shakeout—many of the bets made in the last two years will simply not survive once the easy money disappears.
That’s because the companies building frontier LLMs that already own their own data centers or have real non-AI revenue will keep scaling without pause. Everyone else—especially new LLM startups relying on rented or third-party compute—will get squeezed hard, with less access and worse terms. The result is rapid concentration: a handful of survivors pull further ahead while the rest fade.
Pretty much.
As of the past few weeks, debt markets have almost entirely shut off access to money for any company that doesn’t have substantial revenue independent of AI data centers.
SpaceX closed $40B of debt for GPUs, but we’re investment grade and have Starlink & launch revenue.
That means the 200+ neoclouds are going to see guppy-level death and consolidation. Some will make it through, but not many.
The Best Video on the Internet! Obama Doesn’t Understand How We Got So Divided?
#ExposeTheTruth #Reparations #Migrants #Gaslighting #Michigan #WakeUp #GreatAwakening #Division #BestVideo #ShareThis
Weinstein is right that employers are the primary actors. The full picture is a U.S.-designed system: bipartisan congressional expansions, the contracting model that multiplies the wage gap, and second-order network effects.
1. Employer incentives are the root driver (Borjas ~16% adjusted wage gap / ~$100k savings per worker).
2. Co-ethnic hiring is common across groups (Kerr: ~22.5% average; higher for some nationalities).
3. Body shops and fraud respond to employer demand; contractors often paid ~$48k less than direct hires.
4. Displacement is real locally; restricting H-1B alone often just accelerates offshoring.
5. Cultural claims are weaker than the economic and legislative incentives that created the demand.
The Indians were the tool. The system was built here.
Details
Scoring Methodology:
Score = evidence strength (1–10)
8–10: Strongly supported as a major factor
6–7: Real but secondary or variable
4–5: Partly true or overstated
1–3: Weak or mostly anecdotal
Not a moral judgment — only how well the evidence supports the claim.
1. Employer incentives as root driver
Score: 8/10.
H-1B is employer-sponsored and creates monopsony power. Borjas (NBER) finds an adjusted 16% wage gap vs. comparable natives ($100k savings per worker over six years). Top users include Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Google, and continuing volume at firms like TCS/Cognizant. These incentives originated with and continue to benefit employers; Congress (with bipartisan support on later expansions after the 1990 Act) set the cap and lottery framework they lobbied within.
2. Co-ethnic hiring (common across groups)
Score: 7/10.
Kerr data shows co-ethnic hiring averages ~22.5% across immigrant groups (Vietnam ~45%, China ~43%, Mexico ~31%, India ~21%). It is a general network pattern that strengthens with scale and local density. Documented cases and tech anecdotes show it can become self-reinforcing once groups reach hiring roles—a second-order effect of the initial employer-driven inflow, not unique to one group.
3. Visa fraud and body-shop abuse
Score: 8/10.
Lottery gaming and high-volume intermediary filings respond to employer demand for lower-cost, more controllable labor. End employers create the market; body shops (and the contracting model used by both U.S. consultancies and Indian IT firms) fill it. Contractors are often paid substantially less than direct hires (~$48k gap in one Bloomberg analysis of software roles), amplifying margins for intermediaries while shielding end clients from direct employment costs.
4. Direct displacement and workplace frictions
Score: 6/10.
Individual reports of replacement and adaptation costs are widespread. Aggregate studies are mixed (some crowding-out of substitutes; others industry-level gains). Localized costs are real even if net effects vary. Restricting H-1B alone often shifts work offshore rather than producing large domestic hiring gains, as the underlying cost motive remains.
5. Cultural/tribal factors
Score: 4–5/10.
Network preferences have an ethnic component (see #2). Broader claims of systemic incompatibility are more anecdotal. Economic incentives, the contracting model, and congressional design explain more of the observed patterns than essentialist arguments.
Bottom line
The original demand signal came from U.S. employers operating inside rules shaped with bipartisan congressional involvement and amplified by the contracting/offshoring model. Second-order effects (networks, body shops) followed.
Shifting outcomes requires changing those incentives—via higher prevailing wages, stronger recruitment rules, and enforcement—rather than focusing solely on the workers.
France and Italy are burning today … surprised? UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed (2017) had warned a decade ago: “There will come a day that we will see far more radical extremists and terrorists coming out of Europe because of lack of decision-making, trying to be politically correct… And I’m sorry, but that’s pure ignorance.”
France and Italy are on fire.
Town halls burning. Shops getting looted. Cities that no longer feel safe.
This is what happens after years of mass immigration with almost no real checks on whether people can actually integrate.
Voting Democrat in America is voting for the exact same path - Open borders. Soft rules. The idea that culture and numbers don’t matter. We can see it will lead U.S.A. to become France. If Kamala Harris would have won last election we probably would’ve already been there.
Similarly supporting Congress and CJP-style protests in India for regime change is asking for the same outcome there - Street pressure, institutional fights, and a push to remake the country — while ignoring what France and Italy look like right now.
The results don’t stay theoretical for long.
If you want your country to stay recognizably yours, stop supporting the political parties who support policies that are already destroying other countries!
Republicans aren’t perfect. They’ve fallen short and in places made things tougher for legal immigrants.
But Democrats’ open-border + progressive path is the one already destroying the UK and France — for natives and legal immigrants alike.
This British voice says America is the last refuge left.
Watch this. 👇
Here’s the take from someone in the IT industry for several decades: Most of social media is overreacting and blowing this out of proportion, as if it’s doomsday for the Indian IT industry. It isn’t. It’s just a pause on issuing green cards that are new or already in progress.
1This does not mean US companies will stop working with Indian IT companies. They can’t afford to. Indian consulting firms and their people are deeply embedded in American companies because they know those systems inside out. That knowledge doesn’t transfer overnight. Cutting them out overnight would be like cutting off your own foot.
2Indian IT companies don’t hire Indians by dangling a green card. A green card was always an afterthought, tied to how the employee performed. So the idea that not being able to file for one will sink the business doesn’t hold up.
3Indian IT companies have always hired Americans when they needed to. If this pause forces them to do more of that, they’ll hire more Americans and keep growing.
4These companies aren’t US-only. The US is a big chunk of revenue, sure, but anyone calling this the end of India’s IT services industry is just wrong.
.@Sonderling47: "I am hereby suspending from the Permanent Labor Certification Program some of the largest IT outsourcing firms in the world — Cognizant, Infosys, Tata, Wipro, HCL, and Capgemini — and also, due to multiple active federal investigations, @USDOL is suspending Microsoft and Adobe from the program."
🚨 Crumbl’s Reese’s Collab Cookie Is Straight-Up Poison in Disguise – Skip It!
One single cookie packs the sugar equivalent of 11 Krispy Kreme original glazed donuts. That’s a massive blood-sugar bomb waiting to spike your insulin, crash your energy, pack on fat, and raise your risk for obesity, diabetes, and inflammation over time.
Worse? It’s loaded with 69 ultra-processed ingredients, including these harmful ones the video calls out:
•Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, and Blue 1 synthetic dyes → Linked to behavioral issues and hyperactivity in children. Blue 1 is especially sketchy—it can cross the blood-brain barrier, with unknown long-term effects on your brain and nervous system.
•Hydrogenated oils → These create trans fats (or act like them), which are tied to heart disease, clogged arteries, and chronic inflammation.
•Preservatives and fillers → They extend shelf life but mess with your gut microbiome, trigger inflammation, and offer zero nutrition—just empty junk that keeps you craving more.
This isn’t food. It’s engineered ultra-processed garbage designed to be addictive, not nourishing. Regular consumption fuels the very health crises we’re all trying to avoid.
Choose better instead:
•Make your own at home: Natural peanut butter, oats or almond flour, a touch of honey or dates, dark chocolate chips, and crushed Reese’s-style PB cups (the real ones, no extras). Tastes better and you control every ingredient.
•Grab fresh fruit dipped in real peanut butter or a handful of nuts + a square of 70%+ dark chocolate.
•Support cleaner brands that skip the dyes, hydrogenated oils, and mystery preservatives (check labels—look for short, recognizable ingredient lists).
Your body isn’t a trash can. Vote with your wallet—skip Crumbl and fuel yourself with real food.