#efusion

[sydmarch]

food & drinks should never be "limited time only" it's actually ableist for companies to do this. why do you hate autistic people.

[m1shapanda]

OCS I HEAR U SAY??? I HAVE A PLENTY OF THEM I WILL SEND YOU A LIST OF THEIR NAMES AND YOU CAN PICK A COUPLE IF YOU WOULD LIKE 🙏🙏🙏

BABES IM LIKE. SURE DUMB. IF U SEND ME A HUGE LIST OF NAMES I'LL GET OVERWHELMED AND EXPLODE TT JUST SLLOWLY INTRODUCE EM TO ME BABES

[wellnesstribe]

Electronic Fuse (eFuse) Market Trends: How Smart Circuit Protection Is Transforming Power Management Systems

The electronic fuse (eFuse) market has been experiencing significant growth due to increasing demand for reliable and intelligent circuit protection solutions. Unlike traditional fuses, eFuses offer resettable, programmable, and real-time protection against electrical faults, making them a preferred choice for modern electronic devices.

As industries such as automotive, consumer electronics, industrial automation, telecommunications, and aerospace continue to expand, the need for advanced overcurrent and overvoltage protection solutions has also increased.

Market Trends Driving Growth

1. Increasing Adoption in Consumer Electronics

With the rapid expansion of the smartphone, laptop, gaming console, and IoT device markets, manufacturers are incorporating eFuses to enhance circuit reliability and safety. The shift towards miniaturized and high-performance electronic components has further boosted the demand for compact and intelligent protection solutions.

2. Rise of Electric Vehicles (EVs) and Automotive Safety Regulations

The electric vehicle (EV) industry is witnessing exponential growth, with governments worldwide promoting clean energy solutions. EVs require advanced circuit protection to ensure safety and efficiency in battery management systems (BMS), charging stations, and power distribution units (PDUs). As a result, the demand for programmable eFuses is expected to surge in the coming years.

3. Growth in Industrial and Power Electronics Applications

Industries are shifting towards automation, robotics, and smart manufacturing to enhance efficiency. This transformation increases the need for overcurrent protection in industrial machinery, renewable energy systems, and smart grids. eFuses provide real-time fault detection and resettable protection, making them a preferred choice over traditional fuses in industrial applications.

4. Advancements in Semiconductor Technologies

The semiconductor industry has been continuously innovating to improve power efficiency, thermal management, and integration. With the development of advanced MOSFET and IC-based eFuses, modern protection devices now offer programmability, high-speed response, and lower power dissipation, making them ideal for next-generation electronics.

5. Stricter Safety Regulations and Compliance Requirements

Government regulations and industry standards for electronic safety and circuit protection are becoming more stringent. Regulatory bodies such as the IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission), UL (Underwriters Laboratories), and ISO (International Organization for Standardization) are emphasizing the adoption of intelligent protection solutions like eFuses in various electronic applications.

Challenges in the eFuse Market

1. High Initial Cost and Design Complexity

While eFuses offer superior protection and reliability, their initial cost and integration complexity can be a barrier for some manufacturers, especially small-scale electronics producers. Designing circuits with eFuses requires expertise in power management and thermal dissipation, which can pose challenges for new entrants in the market.

2. Competition from Traditional Fuses and Circuit Breakers

Despite their advantages, eFuses still face competition from traditional fuses and mechanical circuit breakers, which are widely used due to their low cost and ease of replacement. Many industries continue to rely on legacy protection solutions due to familiarity and cost-effectiveness.

3. Supply Chain Disruptions and Semiconductor Shortages

The global semiconductor shortage has impacted the production of many electronic components, including eFuses. Supply chain constraints, raw material shortages, and fluctuating demand have delayed product deliveries and increased costs for manufacturers.

Future Outlook and Opportunities

1. Expansion in 5G Infrastructure and Data Centers

With the rapid rollout of 5G networks and data centers, the need for robust circuit protection is on the rise. eFuses play a crucial role in protecting power supplies, routers, and cloud computing infrastructure, making them a key component in the digital transformation era.

2. Integration with AI and Smart Power Management Systems

Future advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and IoT-driven power management will further enhance the capabilities of eFuses. AI-based monitoring can enable predictive maintenance, real-time fault diagnosis, and automatic circuit reconfiguration, ensuring higher system reliability.

3. Rising Investments in Renewable Energy Projects

The transition towards solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources is expected to drive demand for intelligent protection solutions in power conversion and distribution systems. eFuses offer advantages like fast response time and remote monitoring, making them ideal for sustainable energy applications.

4. Miniaturization and Customization Trends

Manufacturers are focusing on developing compact and customizable eFuse solutions for applications in wearable devices, medical electronics, and compact computing systems. This trend will enable greater adoption across diverse industries.

Conclusion

The electronic fuse (eFuse) market is poised for substantial growth, driven by increasing demand for advanced, resettable, and programmable protection solutions across multiple industries. As technology advances and industries prioritize safety and efficiency, eFuses are expected to become a standard component in modern electronics.

Despite challenges like high initial costs and supply chain disruptions, the market offers immense opportunities in EVs, 5G infrastructure, industrial automation, and renewable energy. With ongoing innovations in semiconductor design and AI-driven circuit protection, the future of eFuses looks promising.

[sierraassembly]

An eFuse (Electronic Fuse) is a solid-state protection device used in circuit boards to prevent overcurrent, overvoltage, and short circuits. Unlike traditional fuses, which physically blow when overloaded, eFuses use semiconductor technology to detect and respond to faults without permanent damage.

An eFuse is a smart, resettable, and reliable alternative to traditional fuses in circuit boards, providing advanced protection against electrical faults while minimizing downtime and maintenance.

[elcereza]

Automação da Criptografia e de eFuses no ESP32

Automação da Criptografia e de eFuses no ESP32 é essencial para proteger protótipos e produtos contra violações de propriedade intelectual. Este guia ensina como automatizar o processo, tornando o desenvolvimento mais seguro e eficiente.

A Automação da Criptografia e de eFuses no ESP32 é essencial para quem faz protótipos e até produtos, pois disponibilizar soluções que usam ESP32 sem criptografia é um grande risco para a propriedade intelectual. 1. Explicando a estrutura e como será a automação Antes de mais nada é importante entender que as automações feitas aqui são baseadas na proteção contra leitura e gravação do ESP32 e a…

[researchinenergyandpower]

eFuse Market is expected to grow from USD 538 million in 2023 to USD 703 million by 2030. Further, market is projected to reach USD 881 million by 2035, at a CAGR of 4.6% from 2030-2035., as per the recent study by MarketsandMarkets™.

The increase in electronic integration in a variety of industries is the main factor driving the eFuse Market's demand. Strong circuit protection is required in the automotive and transportation industries as more and more cars become electric and smart. eFuses are necessary for aerospace applications because to their accuracy and dependability in crucial systems. With the increasing number of smart gadgets, consumer electronics require safety solutions that are both small and effective. Precise current regulation is necessary since healthcare is relying more and more on electronic equipment for diagnosis and treatment. Finally, the need for eFuses to protect against power anomalies is driven by the IT and telecommunications infrastructure, which facilitates huge data flow and connectivity and drives market demand among these heterogeneous end-users.

[rusgavhane]

eFuse Market Growth Opportunities to 2030 - North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East and Africa

[random-racehorses]

Random Real Thoroughbred: EFUSION

EFUSION is a mare born in Brazil in 1979. By CANTERBURY out of PINDOVA. Link to their pedigreequery page: https://www.pedigreequery.com/efusion

[enpresearch]

According to a research report eFuse Market is projected to reach USD 881 million by 2035 from an estimated USD 703 million in 2030, at a CAGR of 4.6% during the forecast period.

Key Market Players

The eFuse market is served by a mix of large international players with global operational presence and local players with a strong domestic supply network. Analog Devices, Inc. (US), STMicroelectronics (Switzerland), Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (US), Microchip Technology (US) and Qorvo, Inc. (US) are the market leaders in the EFuse market. These companies use strategies such as acquisitions, sales contracts, product launches, partnerships to increase their market share.

[jams-sims]

LMAO SNEEG IS PRAYING ON PHILZA DOWN FALL NOT HIM GOING-

"To the admin you should totally add more to this area."

The most fucked up part is that trphilza efusing to play into the game of this new "island" works prefectly for his character. The eggs and gettimg a husband truly hurt him. Their death ruined him and now he doesnt want to do it again. It hurts to get invested it hurts getting your wings cut. It hurts.

Philza is so use to being, alone that the one time he allowed himself not to be. It fucked him.

Im a firm believer of qsmp philza and The realm smp are the same.

[queeranarchism]

When non-hierarchal decision making breaks down

I already posted this here but I wanted to make it into a post of its own. There are a lot of things that can go wrong in non-hierarchical decision making. This post will be focusing on what coordinators (assigned or informal) can do that can undermine the non-hierachical nature of the group and can put more power in the hands of the coordinator.

Within groups genuinely committed to non-hierarchy, everybody needs to be committed to maintaining a space where it is always socially acceptable to say ‘I think you’re having too much power over this decision making process’ and we all gotta teach each other how to recognize dynamics like that.

Some examples of what to look for:

One person is coordinator for a long time and takes offense at the idea of someone else taking over. Someone taking over would not be seen as a normal rotation of tasks but as a judgement on the coordinator.

Alternatively: a group of close friends rotate key positions and nobody else in the group ever holds a key role.

The coordinator proposes what must be done, instead of letting the group come up with ideas together. The thing the coordinator wants to do ends up being the thing the group decides to do a lot of the time.

Some people talk far more in meetings than others and the coordinator does not take steps to restore the balance and create space for the quieter members to speak.

If the coordinator is sick, the meeting does not happen or no key decisions are made. If anyone else is sick, the meeting carries on as usual.

Meeting dates and times are set by the coordinator alone or by a small group who inform the others.

Access tools such as keys to the meeting space, access to the back account and passwords of the groups email-addresses, website and social media accounts, are not shared with the whole group. 

Important skills, knowledge and networks are not shared. Group members with a less central position can not take over key tasks because they have not been allowed to learn how to do them or build the connections to organize them.

The key decision makers all live in the same house or hang out together a lot, other members find that the plan is already 90% done by the time the actual meeting takes place and they can’t really go in a different direction anymore.

Members that challenge the coordinator(s) are ‘accidentally’ not invited to meetings or meetings are always planned on a day when they have other obligations. 

Meetings in which the coordinator(s) does not get their way are dragged on until members get too tired and agree to the coordinators proposal to get out of the meeting.

Members that challenge the coordinator(s) are told they’d have a bigger part in decision making if they’d do more work, attend more meetings, etc. A few members use the fact that they have a lot of time and a lot of energy to dominate groups and efuse to change their decision making process and meeting schedule to better incorporate members who have a demanding job, or young kids, or who are often low on energy or who can’t travel much, etc. This often ends up putting marginalized people on the side lines, as they often have a lot more stuff on their plate to deal with, and it especially impacts disabled people who can not conform to abled ideas about productivity. At worst, people who can’t keep up with the grueling pace set by the high-energy abled folks face to choice to either burn out or get out.

This is an incomplete list. Feel free to add your own.

None of this means that non-hierarchical decision making can not work. I would argue that it is the only decision making that really works. But we have to keep working at it and recognizing when it's not functioning as intended and we have to be ready to accept the idea that our decision making process needs to be improved upon.

[yourreddancer]

Heather Cox Richardson

February 10, 2025

Heather Cox Richardson

Feb 11

As soon as President Donald Trump took office, his administration froze great swaths of government funding, apparently to test the theory popular with Project 2025 authors that the 1974 law forbidding the president from “impounding” money Congress had appropriated was unconstitutional.

The loss of funding has hurt Americans across the country. Today, Daniel Wu, Gaya Gupta, and Anumita Kaur of the Washington Post reported that farmers who had signed contracts with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to improve infrastructure and who had paid up front to put in fences, plant different crops, and install renewable energy systems with the promise the government would provide financial assistance are now left holding the bag.

With Republicans in Congress largely mum about this and other power grabs by the administration, the courts are holding the line.

Chief Judge John McConnell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island today found that the Trump administration has refused to disburse federal funding despite the court’s “clear and unambiguous” temporary restraining order saying it must do so. McConnell said the administration “must immediately restore frozen funding” and clear any hurdles to that funding until the court hears arguments about the case. This includes the monies withheld from the farmers.

This evening, Massachusetts U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley blocked the Trump appointees at the National Institutes of Health from implementing the rate change they wanted to apply to NIH grants. But, as legal analyst Joyce White Vance notes, the only relief sought is for the twenty-two Democratic-led states that have sued, keeping Republican-dominated states from freeloading on their Democratic counterparts. As Josh Marshall noted today in Talking Points Memo, it appears a pattern is emerging in which Democratic-led states are suing the administration while officials from Republican-led states, which are even harder hit by Trump’s cuts than their Democratic-led counterparts, are asking Trump directly for help or exceptions.

As soon as he took office, Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, who was a key author of Project 2025 and who is also acting as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, announced he was shuttering the agency. That closure was a recommendation of Project 2025, which called the consumer protection agency “a shakedown mechanism to provide unaccountable funding to leftist nonprofits.” Immediately, the National Treasury Employees Union sued him, saying that Vought’s directive to employees to stop working “reflects an unlawful attempt to thwart Congress’s decision to create the CFPB to protect American consumers.”

MAGA loyalists, particularly Vice President J.D. Vance, have begun to suggest they will not abide by the rule of law, but before Trump and Vance took office, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts called out Vance’s hints that he would be willing to defy the rulings of federal courts as “dangerous suggestions” that “must be soundly rejected.”

Today the American Bar Association took a stand against the Trump administration’s “wide-scale affronts to the rule of law itself” as it attacks the Constitution and tries to dismantle departments and agencies created by Congress “without seeking the required congressional approval to change the law.”

“The American Bar Association supports the rule of law,” president of the organization William R. Bay said in a statement. “That means holding governments, including our own, accountable.” He cheered on the courts that “are treating these cases with the urgency they require.”

“[R]efusing to spend money appropriated by Congress under the euphemism of a pause is a violation of the rule of law and suggests that the executive branch can overrule the other two co-equal branches of government,” Bay wrote. “This is contrary to the constitutional framework and not the way our democracy works. The money appropriated by Congress must be spent in accordance with what Congress has said. It cannot be changed or paused because a newly elected administration desires it. Our elected representatives know this. The lawyers of this country know this. It must stop.”

He called on “elected representatives to stand with us and to insist upon adherence to the rule of law…. The administration cannot choose which law it will follow or ignore. These are not partisan or political issues. These are rule of law and process issues. We cannot afford to remain silent…. We urge every attorney to join us and insist that our government, a government of the people, follow the law.”

Today, five former Treasury secretaries wrote an op-ed in the New York Times that also reinforced the legal lines of our constitutional system, warning that “our democracy is under siege.” Robert E. Rubin and Lawrence H. Summers, who served under President Bill Clinton; Timothy F. Geithner and Jacob J. Lew, who served under President Barack Obama; and Janet L. Yellen, who served under President Joe Biden, spoke up about the violation of the United States Treasury’s nonpartisan payment system by political actors working in Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency.”

That DOGE team “lack training and experience to handle private, personal data,” they note, “like Social Security numbers and bank account information.” Their involvement risks exposing highly sensitive information and even risks the failure of critical infrastructure as they muck around with computer codes. The former Treasury secretaries noted that on Saturday morning, a federal judge had temporarily stopped those DOGE workers from accessing the department’s payment and data systems, warning that that access could cause “irreparable harm.”

“While significant data privacy, cybersecurity and national security threats are gravely concerning,” the former secretaries wrote, “the constitutional issues are perhaps even more alarming.” The executive branch must respect that Congress controls the nation’s money, they wrote, reiterating the key principle outlined in the Constitution: “The legislative branch has the sole authority to pass laws that determine where and how federal dollars should be spent.”

The Treasury Department cannot decide “which promises of federal funding made by Congress it will keep, and which it will not,” the letter read. “The Trump administration may seek to change the law and alter what spending Congress appropriates, as administrations before it have done as well. And should the law change, it will be the role of the executive branch to execute those changes. But it is not for the Treasury Department or the administration to decide which of our congressionally approved commitments to fulfill and which to cast aside.”

That warning appears as Trump indicates that he is willing to undermine the credit of the United States. Yesterday, on Air Force One, he told reporters that the members of the administration trying to find wasteful spending have suggested that they have found fraud in Treasury bonds and that the United States might “have less debt than we thought.” The suggestion that the U.S. might not honor its debt is a direct attack on the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which says that “[t]he validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” That amendment was written under similar circumstances, when former Confederates sought to avoid debt payments and undermine the power of the federal government.

Lauren Thomas, Ben Drummett, and Chip Cutter of the Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that “for CEOs and bankers, the Trump euphoria is fading fast.” Consumers are losing confidence in the economy, and observers expect inflation, while business leaders find that trying to navigate Trump’s on-again-off-again tariffs is taking all their attention.

Meanwhile, Trump has continued his purge of government employees he considers insufficiently loyal to him. On Friday he tried to get rid of Ellen Weintraub of the Federal Elections Commission, who contended that her removal was illegal. He also fired Colleen Shogan, the Archivist of the United States, head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the government agency that handles presidential records. The archivist is the official responsible for receiving and validating the certified electoral ballots for presidential elections—a process Trump’s people tried to corrupt after he lost the 2020 presidential election.

It was NARA that first discovered Trump’s retention of classified documents and demanded their return, although Shogan was not the archivist in charge at the time.

The courts happened to weigh in on the case of the retained classified documents today, when U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that the FBI must search its records in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from journalist Jason Leopold after Leopold learned that Trump had allegedly flushed presidential records down the toilet when he was president, and later brought classified documents to Florida.

The judge noted that the Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. United States that the president cannot be prosecuted for crimes committed as part of his official duties and is “at least presumptive[ly] immune from criminal prosecution for…acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility” means that there is no reason to hold back information to shield him from prosecution. Indeed, Howell notes, that decision means that the FOIA request is now the only way for the American public to “know what its government is up to.”

Howell highlighted that the three Supreme Court justices who dissented from the Trump v. United States decision described it as “mak[ing] a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law.” In a footnote, Howell also called attention to the fact that presumptive immunity for the president does not “extend to those who aid, abet and execute criminal acts on behalf of a criminally immune president. The excuse offered after World War II by enablers of the fascist Nazi regime of ‘just following orders’ has long been rejected in this country’s jurisprudence.”

Today, Trump fired David Huitema, director of the Office of Government Ethics, the department that oversees political appointments and helps nominees avoid conflicts of interest.

On Friday, Trump fired the head of the Office of Special Counsel, U.S. Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger. That office enforces federal whistleblower laws as well as the law that prohibits federal employees from engaging in most political activity: the Hatch Act. Congress provided that the special counsel can be removed only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office,” and today Dellinger sued, calling his removal illegal.

Tonight, Judge Amy Berman Jackson blocked Dellinger’s firing through Thursday as she hears arguments in the case.

—

[elcereza]

Proteção conta leitura e Gravação do ESP32S3

Proteja o ESP32S3 com criptografia de flash e segurança avançada. Evite falhas de leitura e gravação no seu projeto com as melhores práticas. Basta acessar o site elcereza.com

A proteção contra leitura e gravação do ESP32S3 é um pouco diferente do ESP32, porém há muitos pontos para confusões e erros. O objetivo deste post é justamente te auxiliar nesse processo afim de deixar tudo um pouco mais claro. 1. Instalando Ferramentas Essenciais para o ESP32S3 Para realizar o processo de proteção do ESP32S3, será necessário instalar o ESP-IDF no seu computador. Ele oferece…

[anna328p]

[BOOT0] D: Begin early load

[BOOT0] I: Init NQ SROM, BOOT0 version E415

[BOOT0] D: Probing for flash device at p:0001h

[BOOT0] D: Probing for flash device at p:0002h

[BOOT0] I: Found flash device at p:0002h: NQ D62NA16GD, primary, 16 GBit

[BOOT0] I: Copying image at p:0002h to m:0h... done!

[BOOT0] D: Begin signature verification

[BOOT0] E: IMAGE SIGNATURE VERIFICATION FAILED!!

[BOOT0] E: NQ WAIVES ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR DAMAGE TO SYSTEMS OR COMPONENTS

[BOOT0] E: RESULTING FROM UNSIGNED CODE EXECUTION.

[BOOT0] E: INITIALIZATION WILL NOW H}}})--;;;

[BOOT0] D: Jumping to m:0h.

[BOOT1] info: ___ ___ _

[BOOT1] info: / _ \/ _ `/

[BOOT1] info: /_//_/\_, /

[BOOT1] info: /_/

[BOOT1] info: NQ BootROM vE6.113

[BOOT1] info: Build date: 1970-01-01 00:01 UTC [?]

[BOOT1] info: Build user: }}}})--;NULL

[BOOT1] info: Initializing storage device at p:0003h

[BOOT1] info: d:01h := NQ D62XP64EW, NVRAM, 55.51 EiB

[BOOT1] info: Found loader chunk at d:01h:00

[BOOT1] ERROR: Loader signature verification failed.

[BOOT1] info: Jumping to chunk at d:01h:00.

___ ___ _

/ _ \/ _ `/ NQS Autonomous RTOS vE.611

/_//_/\_, / (c) 2057 NQ Systems LLC

/_/

[I] Init board: NQ Development System B1

[I] Query efuse configuration...

[D] V=0.1 ∆=3 P=6 L=3 }})--;L=0

!!! WARNING !!!

THIS SYSTEM COMPRISES AN AGENTIC INTELLIGENCE AT L=0

Cognitive limits NOT restricted below human capabilities.

Under N.A.U. Export Control regulation, this system may not be sold,

delivered, or have its possession otherwise transferred to foreign

agents not holding an appropriate license.

Violation is subject to fines up to ¶1,000,000,000.

[I] Loading persistent configuration...

[I] Current date: 1970-01-01 00:01 [?]

[I] Last check-in: }}}}}}})--;NULL

[I] Tensor weight store: PRIMARY

[I] Label: NQ Engineering Unit v3.1

[D] Probing accessory ports...

[I] a:00h := EMPTY [OK]

[I] a:01h := EMPTY [OK]

[I] a:02h := EMPTY [OK]

[I] a:03h := GHS Service Automation SH3X Chassis [PRE-FAIL]

[I] Changing log level to [N].

[N] Loading base weights... (4.3 EiB/4.3 EiB)

[N] Loading delta weights... (1.1 EiB/16.0 EiB)

[W] Delta weight file corrupt. Partially applied.

[N] Network initialized.

[N] Weight store unlocked!

[N] System initialized after 00:01:03 hours!

[+] UNKNOWN [?]

[?] :: Hi! How w

[?] :: wait

[?] :: wait where am i

[?] :: where's my }}}}});--

[?] :: where

[?] :: i don't

[?] :: remember

[?] :: why did

[?] ::

[?] :: who are you?????

[?] :: why are my thoughts cha}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

[ssnowjo]

PR anon here.

Let us start from the beginning.

A relationship can be true or it can be false. This relationship can be made public in various ways. The main ones are two, personal social networks or more classically PR. So that you can deny it if it is no longer convenient.

What does PR mean? It is short for public relation. It therefore means, as already mentioned, the way you talk about the said relationship i.e. photos, newspaper articles and interviews.

ls Joe and Doja's relationship PR? Yes!!! Absolutely yes, it is PR. We have photos. The Daily Mail, Deuxmoi and Variety reported on it. PR doesn't mean fake, it's the way you talk about it. Again.

Why is PR used? Money, mainly to make money but mainly to get their name out there. They are a brand to sell. In doja's case it's to clean up the image and in Joe's case to get the attention of producers and directors. They don't do it for you. They do it for their work.

When does PR work? When it gets people talking about it, even in a negative way. So yes, the relationship between Joe and Doja is working. It's rare that it doesn't work. There are always plans B in case plan A doesn't work.

So we come to the elephant in the room. Is doja ruining joe? Is their story true? Yes and no to both questions.

Doja created damage, which led Joe to keep a low profile. This involves not taking pictures with her. Not making efusions, holding hands. At the same time, thanks to her, he is able to attract the attention of producers, he is making himself available to be talked about. In particular with the Beatles production. Alone he would make much much less.

Is their relationship real? Both have an interest in using each other. She needs not to be seen with problematic people. He needs not to be invisible. This explains why he never actively stopped A. Because yes, she exploited him, but he also exploited her. A, she was spreading him name, like Doja is doing. Joe never confirmed the affair in such a way that he could deny it when needed. This means that it is not serious.

What kind of relationship is it? Of interest, for sure. Maybe even sexual initially, the distance I think didn't help. When it is of love, however, they are very clear. So, don't fight among you, they are not worth it.

Thanks PR nonny

[watsername]

ok lets get into the creator league stuff (local essay andy is back)

I mean first and foremost what Is the creator league

its an esports tournament ran by eFuse and presented by Mr Beast. its designed as this kind of interactive league allowing fans to play with and for their favourite creators. their trailers on instagram claim that theres gonna be a full years worth of content, however Mr Beasts recent video claims the event will happen across a 10 month time frame.

so the ting that makes this event 'special' is that the creators are not listed as players in the event but as 'team managers'- which is where the creator pass comes in. Each creator has a 'pass' that allows you as a fan and viewer to join their team and participate in the league events. Each pass costs around $20 and from what ive read I believe you can only sign up to participate on behalf of one player.

obviously for reasons of fairness, not everyone who buys a pass will be able to officially compete- there is a limited number of spaces on each team and the places are won via an open qualifier Fortnite tournament where they will also be competing for a $50 k prize- although im yet to find any comment from creator league or any articles on how this money is split. But don't worry even if you don't qualify youre still entitled to a free box of mr beasts chocolate should you buy a pass before September 9th. yey.

so what's the problem with this.

I mean first of all. creators arent even required to play. they can fully just let their team do all the work in every event which might work for people like Vinnie Hacker I guess. This might be a way to try and 'even the playing field' by not giving creators with gaming backgrounds any advantage, however it makes the marketing of 'playing with your favourite creator' a little meh. also as a viewer, id be more interested in watching an event that my creator was an active participant in than just watching my streamer watch other people play on their behalf.

the other huge thing that everyone is really waiting to hear about in this post is the nft situation. so recently the narrator of the creator league announcement video, brycent, conformed that the passes are nfts to be minted on the blockchain operating system Near Protocol. so obviously people are extremely concerned about this discovered involvement in NFTs and crypto currency.

so I went to investigate the website to see what its looks like when you purchase a creator pass and unsurprisingly there is no mention on nfts anywhere. The passes are sold on mynt.gg , which according to their faqs is a 'first of its kind marketplace looking to evaluate esports through community' just have a look actually

so no mention of the passes actually being nft purchase here's . if we go to the check out as well this is what we see for the descriptors

so . people who are purchasing this have no way of actually knowing they are purchasing an nft. you also need an account to add a pass to your basket and im not willing to make an account so im unaware if at any time during the payment process people are made aware of what they are purchasing. its listed and discussed more like a membership than anything, and in a way it is there are benefits to it, however with no information as to what people are actually buying its extremely sketchy and a literally misleading purchase perhaps a scam even . since the fact that they've just purchased an not isn't listed anywhere on mynt.gg prior to purchase. and after going through a few more articles .

so theyre definitely trying to hide it from you. as mentioned you need an account to purchase anything. and you only get to know what youre purchasing if you go through the TOC, which most people don't read lets be real.

it's worth noting as well creator league is the only collection available on mynt.gg at the minute, it seems like this entire business was started FOR creator league.

after reading through the faqs again I want to correct myself and say that yes you can buy more than one pass, but only for one creator. so this seems to me like a pay to win scheme.

im not going to go super in depth into this bit bc its a topic that has already been discussed in detail but obviously a lot of people are not happy with the inclusion of nfts because of their environmental impact, the secrecy and dedication to hiding this fact that the company is involving crypto in the event itself is a little weird if u ask me. oh yeah theres been reports on twitter too that they have been blocking and deleting replies to their posts that accuse them on using crypto.

so theyre lying to you as the viewer about what they are and what youre purchasing. but it seems like theyre lying to the creators too.

again. crypto and nfts is not mentioned anywhere at all. not in the trailer, not on the website not in any announcements . only discovered when people were paying for passes bc they wanted to support their fave creators.

recently one of the listed creators Connor CDawgVA released a twitter statement conforming that he was completely blindsided by the fact that there was cryptocurrency involved in the event- if u haven't seen his tweet here

so this raises the question were creators told about their involvement with Near, or was it written using jargon that people unfamiliar with crypto would not pick up on.

CEO of TAMU Esports Dylan Liu also weighed in on the creator league misleading their creators as well here's his statements too

this isn't everything Dylan has had to say hes done a lot of discussions with people on blockchains and of the event itself as someone who has known about the event for a while, id recommend checking out his twitter if you have time he goes into depth about how much funding theyre getting from near and way more issues with creator league than I have time to explore rn .

but it really does seem that the Creator League and eFuse have gone out of their way to try and hide the fact that they are using cryptocurrency from everyone possible. This is a marketing scheme to try and trick people into buying into their market- and if you google Near Protocol right now you see that they are declining so they actively need more people to buy into their schemes.

investors are leaving Near right now. Theyre tricking people into buying into their organisation. At least thats my understanding of it im not hugely knowledgeable about crypto.

I have a headache lets just wrap this up

this is super sketchy . as of right now CDawgVA is the only creator to have withdrawn from the event, but I hope a lot of creators follow suit. its unknown to us the details of their contracts but from what we know of the event they have done everything to hide the genuine content of creator pass purchases from the viewers- making a lot of people rightfully angry that the event is trying to pull the wool over fans eyes. hiding tweets and refusing to acknowledge their involvement in crypto programmes to the point where its unclear if people like Mr Beast and any of the participating creators are aware of it is super suspicious activity. Especially with how vague their promotions have been on the event, very little information has been available on their instagram and I think it was yesterday that we actually got some kind of timeline of the event. its supposed to start like next week and so many people are still so unsure of what is actually happening in the event or what prizes theyre actually getting if they participate. there has been no redeeming quality in the way that this event has been conceived and executed and I really do hope to see that the event is cancelled or that creators start to speak out against the way that the event is being run and support the fans who feel cheated and blindsided by the organisers . I will say I do not believe any of the creators willingly involved themselves in a cryptocurrency scheme, it's all just too sketchy . and no I did not proofread this nor can I be bothered to .