As you might expect from a legend like Barbara Streisand, she has a legendary mansion to match. This singer and actress hails from New York but these days resides on the west coast in an exclusive Malibu neighborhood. Her estate is made up of multiple properties and even boasts features like its own shopping mall. In these videos we don't reveal any addresses and even though I've done a house tour of my own place please do not show up at any private residences because it's not safe for anyone. Barbara Streisand or Babs as she's known to her nearest and dearest is an American singer, songwriter and actor from Brooklyn, New York. Her career began in her teenage years when she took to singing at local nightclubs and worked her way up to several guest appearances on television series like The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson. Following her breakout role in the feature film Funny Girl Streisand would become a global superstar. Shortly thereafter she would also go on to become one of the most successful artists in history when she'd produce close to a dozen top 10 albums and win multiple Grammy awards. All of these accomplishments helped Babs bag a net worth estimated to be in the astounding $400 million range. And guess what? Damn near a quarter of that worth is wrapped up in Barbara's real estate compound located in Southern California. Located in Malibu's Point Doom neighborhood, this jaw-dropping estate not only consists of three parcels of land acquired over several years, but also includes, and I promise you I'm not kidding, its very own mall. Either of you met Barbara Streisand and been to her underground mall. Hey guys it's Kara back with another exclusive house tour here on Famous Entertainment and today we're checking out where Barbara Streisand calls home and trust me it's a beachside paradise. Don't forget to like, subscribe and hit me up on Instagram to chat. Now let's get into this video. Barbara's love affair with her gigantic compound began in 1984. That's when she first glimpsed the main house on the property which was located not far from her ranch she was living in at the time. Believe it or not, but when Babs offered to buy the house from its then occupants they told her straight up no way. So what did she do? Well she wound up buying the two adjacent properties and simply waited out the other couple. When those two owners eventually split from one another about 10 years later, Babs swooped in and finally got her hands on the property she wanted all along. In terms of the exterior, the back of the home is painted white and faces a breathtaking stretch of oceanfront. Meanwhile, the front of the home is painted red and the surrounding exterior boasts extensive gardens with 100 rose bushes as well as dahlias and snapdragons. Soon after moving in, Barbara came up with what she calls the script for her new family home and its construction. What she imagined was this. A post-colonial family settled onto the property in 1790 where they soon built a mill to ground their wheats. Once the family began to prosper they built their farmhouse which was added onto substantially in 1904. I mean I've heard about actors creating a backstory for their characters before but for the house in which they live, Babs definitely took that idea to a whole new level. All in all, the compound contains 47,000 square feet of space that includes the following buildings. A rustic mill house with a 14 foot high 4,000 pound water wheel. There's also a building referred to as grandma's house which is basically just a cozy guest cottage filled to the brim with quilts. Then there's the main house. A 10,500 square foot elegant white mansion featuring eight bedrooms and something like 11 bathrooms. The heart of the property is definitely the giant U shaped barn flanked by a stone silo. Inside this space a two tiered central room leads to a show house collection of period settings. A lounge, library, a luscious office, a bathroom, a room dedicated to napping and yes, the long rumored about shopping mall. Don't worry, we're going to circle back to that soon. Despite the fact that Barbara has spent years of her life perfecting all these spaces with endless NT hunting, not to mention scouring the world for authentic and properly sourced materials that fit in naturally, only ever sleeps inside the main house. When speaking with Harper's Bazaar about her routine, she told them that she and her husband James Brolin treat the barn like a B&B, as if we went away for the weekend but we don't have to drive, there are projects. That's not to say she doesn't love to show off what she's created. Bazaar even invites her famous Hollywood friends over for a guided two hour tour precisely mapped out by the starlet herself. In fact, she told Harper's Bazaar that the last actor to take her up on the offer was actually Jennifer Aniston. And while Barbara might be in charge of most of the house, that doesn't mean her hubby doesn't have his own special space as well. James not only has his own office, a bathroom and a workshop, but the couple recently expanded during the pandemic and they turned a tiny concrete block house on the property into a screening room. When it came time to decorate her home, Babs not only found the room for her eight Grammys, two Oscars, eight Golden Globes and three Emmys, she also filled it with a whole bunch of prestigious and expensive items of decoration. For instance, she bought masterpiece paintings by artists like Gustav Stickley, Charles and Henry Green, as well as Charles Rennie McIntosh. To do a house in only two color streams, looking into the period, into the 20s and the 30s. And while Babs has been pretty careful when it comes to making sure that pictures of the interior of her home are hard to come by, the few that she shared with architectural digest give us a taste. Like for instance, the living room, which includes a fireplace embellished by an arrangement of stainless steel decorative panels that were once part of the landmark Art Deco Richfield building in downtown LA. Throughout most of the home, Babs has utilized only four colors, burgundy, rose, black and gray. A color palette that extends even to the kitchen where the tile work complements the pinstripes in the cabinet. As for her bedroom, while the carpeting was copied from a 1930s Biccolo original that Babs once saw inside the Huntington Hotel in San Francisco. It also involves what she calls a swan motif with the step ceiling cut into curved shapes on one side and geometric shapes on the other. And what might be the only departure from the home's overall aesthetic, the powder room located on the first floor utilizes patterns in Deco style light fixtures. And then there's also a bar room that was converted from a garage and overlooks the lushly landscaped rear garden and swimming pool. I know what you guys want to hear about. Babs one of a kind home shopping mall. Located in the basement of the Streisand family barn is a cobblestone paved antique lantern lit facade street that's meant to resemble a turn of the last century style shopping district. And it's not just a shop or two, it's an entire fleet of them. Once you fill yourself with licorice, frozen yogurt or popcorn, then head over to the sweet shop. There's also an antique shop, clothes shop and a doll shop. And if Babs ever needs to pick up a small gift for someone else, she just walks into her own gift shop to pick up a soap dish or a pair of candlesticks. The only thing that's missing, cash registers, because why would she even need them? The shopping center has come together over a period of years and involved a lot of careful research on Babs Park. After a trip to the legendary decorative arts museum, Winterhur, located in Delaware, she became fascinated with 19th century shops. She told Harper's Bazaar, seeing Winterhur's indoor street, I thought how ingenious that was. Instead of just storing my things in the basement, I can make a street of shops and display them. So after filming Wrapped on Meet the Falkers in 2004, Barbara asked the production designer on the film to lend her a few set pieces as opposed to simply destroying them. Out of all the shops located down there, it's the antique clothes shop that's the real gem. The store is basically a museum dedicated to the stars most famous costumes over the years, including the infamous gown from Funny Girl made of green chiffon over pink silk. Barbara's shopping mall would even inspire playwright named Jonathan Tallins to create a stage piece in which an inspiring actor is offered the job to work in Streisand's basement mall called Byer and Seller. Famous and talented and litigious as Barbara Streisand. Jonathan came up with the idea after checking out Babs' book, My Passion for Design, which offers hundreds of photographs that document the creation of her dream house. Unfortunately, if you wanna see most of them, you're gonna have to buy that book. As for what else we learned in it, well, according to Barbara, she and James spend most of the morning in bed and the very first thing she does is reach over for her laptop and begin trading stocks. Seriously, she doesn't even want some coffee first? That must be how you earn yourself a $400 million empire and wind up living in a colonial village of your own. Well, when yours accomplishes Barbara Streisand, you can live your life however you want. Well, that'll bring this Barbara Streisand house tour to a close. What did you guys think of her incredible compound? What was your favorite feature? Hermini shopping mall or another one of those well thought out luxuries on the property? We can't forget those ocean views either. Be sure to let me know what you think in the comments down below. Thanks for watching. Don't forget to follow me on Instagram and I'll see you all in the next video. Bye.


Hi everyone, Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com. Back on Friday the 10th, we did a three box Chronicles soccer break, random team break number two. What I forgot to do is there are a number of teams, so here's the official printout right there. There is a number of teams that aren't represented on this list, and I was supposed to randomize them as one lot to one person to break. So I never ended up doing it, forgot, so I apologize about that. So let's flip back to this screen here, and let's grab everyone's names from Rory down to Josh. So everybody in, and everybody in between. Name on top, we'll get those extra cards. There's some numbered cards. I don't think there are any, there probably weren't any autographs, because then I would have randomized, I would have known, because it would have shown up on the list, so there are probably no hits, but some numbered cards in there. So let's roll it and randomize it. Name on top after eight, two and a six, eight times. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, and Chelsea hosting Norwich right here. Eighth and final time, name on top after eight. Little, some extra cards going to, Greg, Greg Brewer. There you go, you're the winner of these extra cards right here. Now the value for these Chronicles have actually been pretty great, so it's probably worth looking up each of these players and seeing if they have some sneaky good value. So there you go, Greg. Thank you very much for getting in, appreciate it. Thanks everybody. Joe for JaskiesCaseBreaks.com. I'll see you for the next one. Bye bye.


Yeah, you do not know you are not an oracle, you want to your goal has been set like you want to maximize the mean reward how you are going to do. So, one thing is naive strategy I do not care about what goal you set I just do beating in the dark right, I there are there are I have been asked to play t rounds what I will do is I will play each one of them equal proportion of rounds ok. So, let us say there are k actions or k arms and there are t rounds you play each one of them equal number of times that is t by k number of rounds you play one each each one of them is that fine you can do this, but do you think this is going to be good policy I will just try it all of them right or what you can do is instead of playing all of them equal number of times you may just randomly uniformly select arm in each round right. Let us say there are 10 arms you give 1 by 10 probability to each one of them and in each round you just pull one of this arm with this probability like this is uniform probability and just play that do you think this is going to be anything good. So, in both of these cases when you played each of the arm t by k number of rounds or played them according to the uniform sampling, you are basically not learning right like you are not taking into the feedback that you are going to see you are just like ok whatever happens I am just going to do this that is that is never going to get you to the optimal strategy right that is never going to improve. So, you are just basically ignoring what happens what does it mean by empirical question that we are going to talk now. So, if you just ignore whatever you observed in the policy first like you just played all of them equal number of times or just sample them uniformly according to uniform distribution you are not adopting or you are not even thinking of learning here right. So, you are not going to do any better. So, policy 2 what you can do better I have listed already but think through what you what you think you could have done better. So, I am interacting with the environment right I apply environment told whether that applied action was good or bad I have this information. So, from this I can do any better.  So, you have observed how good a action is through your past actions past observations right. So, let us focus on one let us say you out of this 100 rounds let us say you have out of this 100 you have applied a one particular action let us say 10 times and for this 10 times you would have observed its feedback right. Can you take this 10 observations and find out what is the empirical mean of that action can you what I am doing how I am computing the empirical mean that is why it should say let us say Bernoulli case and let us say I am every time I am going to play this particular action I am going to get independent observations. So, all of you know what is independent IID. So, how many of you are do not know what is IID all of you know it ok. So, if you can if let us say these observations are independent let us say and but they are Bernoulli like as I said like you can just count how many times I observed one take average and that is going to give me the empirical mean value right. So, let us say out of this 100 rounds whatever I can based on my observation I can compute empirical mean for each of this arm. Once I have empirical mean what I can do take the arm with the highest empirical mean. So, is that good. So, do you think anybody it sees that this is not really good strategy ok how many of you agree at least that it is better than the first policy yeah. Just one round how will we get the. Not one round I said let us say you have already ok first round first round is do not have any sample right you cannot do anything let us say ok first let us say you have 3 actions you do not know like which one is better because you do not have even one sample. So, at least as a bare minimum let us say we start with playing each one of them once. Now, I have got one one sample for each one of them right. So, you lost k rounds in this already because you have played each one of them and in the k plus 1 I can compute empirical mean right because at least like I have one sample, but in the trivial case that one sample itself is the empirical mean. Let us say you played something and some particular action you have played some number of times and based on that n number you can compute the empirical mean right. So, once you have this empirical mean you can order them and play which is the best one. So, ok again so all of many of you said it is better than first, but any of you feel that this is not really better than first or at least in some cases first one have been better than second one. So, goal is not I said the sum we have to maximize the reward. So, anybody has any feeling that still first one is better when I wanted to maximize the sum of the rewards. So, at least we are going to play k rounds where we we are trying to get one sample from each one of them. First k rounds that is what like after that we just compute the empirical mean and from k plus 1 round onwards I will pick the one which has the highest empirical mean.  Then I updated its empirical value rest of them remain the same and in the k plus second round I again choose the one which has the highest empirical mean. So, fine like it looks like a second policy is going to be better than the first, but what is bad about this? In many cases like in second policy if we have two rewards A B and one of them is somewhat good, but second one is very good. If we had chosen the action like randomly then we would have been somewhere in the mid of mid value like P 1, P 2 we would have P 1 plus P 2 by 2 if we have been doing randomly. But if at a point of time like initially P 2 was bad. So, we started picking P 1 and we ended up finally having P 1 at the end. So, this one is there might be cases where policy one performs better of this case. But here fine like let us say let us for just for understanding purpose let us say there are only two actions ok and let us say action one has higher mean than the second action. So, in this case action one is optimal right, but I just do not know this I just know that there are two actions. So, can you imagine a scenario in which second policy is going to be bad in this case, but what first policy said? First policy said like if I said t equals to 100, it said that 50 times of the time play a first action and 50 time of the time you say second action ok. But what is the second policy saying? It is saying each time you just play one in the first two rounds pick one of them and after that pick the one which has the highest empirical mean that time right. So, let us say in the first two samples right k equals to 2, first round I played arm one in that it so happened that I got a zero sample in that and in the second round I played arm action two and I happened to get sample one there right. I could still get sample sample one from second arm it is not necessary that I have to get zero only even though it has a smaller mean right, it may still throw up one. So, what happens in the third round? Arm two you are going to pick. So, will you be stuck in a bad arm in this case? Right, because whatever you are going to observe from arm two its empirical mean is going to be larger than zero right, because it has at least already one that observation one included there. So, you could end up stuck in a bad arm in policy two. So, how to avoid this trap getting stuck in a bad action choose ok. So, he is suggesting that do not take just one one sample and then start doing empirical. So, focus initially dedicate some rounds to get the samples and then take the empirical means. So, in this case the probability that you get trapped in this bad scenario is going to be small. Is that all of you agree with that? We must still end up getting trapped in a bad value, but it is slightly better than policy two right that the that scenario arising is slightly better than policy two ok. So, how to go about this? What we are saying is so, one way of characterizing what is said is let us choose an epsilon which is between 0, 1. So, for the initial epsilon t rounds that is some fraction of my overall t rounds let us do collect sample from all of them ok. So, collecting sample from all of them is going we are going to call this as simply exploration ok. So, how collected samples from all of them it is up to you you can either go and do a random selection in the initial epsilon t rounds or you do epsilon t by k rounds for each of the arms collect it and then after you doing that in the from after epsilon t rounds you do go and select the one which is empirically best. So, when I say go and select the one which is empirically best that is what I call it as exploitation. So, what are the current situation I have I am from that I am just going to try and choose the best one ok. So, do you think this should work better than policy one and policy two depends then depends on what? . Where is C here? So, then now your problem one headache has transferred to another headache right now how to choose this epsilon ok. So, you can choose. So, now you have a good strategy choose this epsilon. So, what happens? So, if epsilon is 0 and epsilon is 0, but I still got one sample from each one of them then this is policy two right. No sorry, if epsilon 0 basically I am not doing any exploration I am just for doing exploitation. So, it is not policy two. So, if what is it epsilon equals to 1? . It is going to be policy one I am just exploring like I am just maybe selecting all of them uniformly random or just like taking playing each one of them equal number of times, but then here a problem is like epsilon how to choose and it has to be between 0, 1. So, if epsilon is going to be smaller value then you are exploring less right and you are just jumping for exploitation not good and if epsilon is 1 we are exploring too much and exploiting less. So, that is also not good. So, you have to hit a balance between that right. So, so too much exploration or even too much exploitation is not good. If exploration is high what is going to happen? If exploration is high at the end of this exploration you might be you might start playing the good one, but for a lot number of rounds you have played bad actions that is not good. And similarly if you start prematurely exploiting right you would have not collected enough information. So, you may start exploiting bad arm and that is also not good. So, you have to find balance between these two. So, this is just one example I have here just to demonstrate this. So, you see that in all this when you are trying to make a decision in this uncertain environment this natural phenomenon of how much to explore and how much to exploit comes into picture right. So, the whole crux of this course will be about understanding how much to explore and how much to exploit or is there a way like I can do this together exploration and exploitation. So, just let us say I mean this is some quick experiment here let us say I have set 5 arms here with the means like this 0.3, 0.35, 0.78, 0.8, 0.5 which is the best arm here. So, action arm 4 is the best one right. So, if you know that you would always like to play this one, but you do not know this, but let us say I am going to I have been given what is this, this is some 10000 number of rounds. Suppose in the previous policy I discussed let us say I set epsilon equals to 0 that means I am all just going to do exploitation this is the mean reward I am going to get over 10000 rounds. So, had I always pulled this 0.8 this is the total mean I expect right like almost like out of 10000 rounds 0.8 of that like around 8, 8000 is what I expect the mean reward to be if I have played always action 4. But let us say I am started playing only exploitation this much I get, but as I increase epsilon to 0.01 did little bit of exploration my mean reward actually increased this much. But if I increase further this epsilon like did more exploration my total mean actually decreased and it decreased and I get the again bad. So, you see that if I increase epsilon 0 to 1 I am kind of getting a bell shaped curve here. So, it says that there is a sum epsilon that is good that is between 0 and 1, but I have to figure out what is that. So, a good policy has to balance between this exploration and exploitation. So, throughout our course that will be our focus how to do this. So, there are some good policies that we are going to visit in this course. A quick applications we just discussed some, but some what are the application from other field right it is not just about recommendation systems. There are this multi-unbanded has applications in many things. The one I did not put it here the one that is of very importance is in the medical field and that is where some of the studies of this multi-unbanded started. So, suppose let us say you have a drug you want to identify a drug which is most effective on the population. So, when initially drug is prepared nobody knows like how effective it is right. Maybe it is it has to be lab tested. So, what how you really do like either we do testing on some rats or something or maybe like if you are brave enough we may directly go and try on humans ok, but whatever it is we want to make sure that the damage is the minimum right. So, we want to initially we do not know which is the best. So, initially maybe you want to keep trying this different one, but obviously because the penalty is too much here it is life involved here what we want to do is quickly identify the drug which is the most effective ok. So, what do you feel like this does this model fits here. So, here think of patients as the environment like how so that are coming in each round and environment is like we do not know the effectiveness of this drugs and your actions are number of drugs you have or number of treatments you have. You apply on them you see how effective that treatment was like maybe when you apply that drug that patient got cured immediately and he started jumping. So, you are very happy about that drug, but it may happen that the same drug if you apply in the something that guy immediately died. So, I mean it may not this as effects effectiveness may not be the same, but what we are interested is the one which is most effective on this population that is the best we can guarantee right how to figure it out right. So, but what we from the modeling point of all with these things that at least in the beginning we will assume that that effectiveness is going to be the same on each one of you. So, let us say in the in the beginning I will assume that all of you are at the same capability. It may be possible that all of may have different different capability and based on that the action our attention have to give is going to be the same for each one of you, but we will not make both are possible and at least in the drug example it is assumed that all the patients are the same effective on the drugs. We will study actually both the models what you are saying. So, the effectiveness of a drug on a person need not be the same it could be different depend it could depend on that person in that way environment is not the same ok. So, there are many other possibilities like in the if you are from communication background it could be like packet routing. So, and also like not just packet routing it is like about you want to find the best path from a source to destination right. So, let us say you are you are at your home and you are going to office someday and you have some three four route options available. So, the time it takes you to traverse on this route depends on multiple things right the conjunction weather environment whatever other things may. So, you have to figure out which is the best route for you best here is the one which gives you the smallest travel time. So, can you think of modelling this as this multi embedded problem? So, what are the actions here? So, the number of routes available to you right and who is the learner here learner is the you like who is taking these paths to reach your office ok. So, such things and also like this one ad placement like when when we visit this web pages we will say that we are bombarded with so many advertisements right. So, there is a whole big business behind this. So, people would each slot there in the advertisement people want to put an ad in which you are most interested and most likely to click. So, if you click on that somebody is going to make money out of that. So, they would like to identify in the given slot which is the most appropriate ad to put. Can you think of it as a multi embedded problem something like let us say I have slot and there are some 10 ads that are available to put in this slot and I have to decide which is the advertisement I am going to put in this slot so that it gets the most clicks. So, then what are the actions here? There is only one slot one one advertisement slot I mean there are many, but let us think consider only one slot in the top. So, just like here the advertisements are the number of arms you want to decide which is the one you want to put that has the highest number of click probability. Each one you can think of modeling differently or maybe you can come up with some variants of this. So, that like if I just not one location you are interested it, but all the possibilities you can now think of the arms as all possible combinations and then you have to expand your problem according. So, this is their minimum we discussed like there are many variants that are possible as I said this is a very active research area you will see some of them will cover basics, but as for the project I would ask you to explore different variants of this bandits that we are that have been studied like some of the things could be like contextual bandits where you are not interested in showing one particular action, but the action is curated in the sense you want to play action that is the instance specific. So, for example, when you put an ad and you know that the guy who is visiting that web page is a very young person maybe you would like to put a some sports shoe or something related to sports rather than some putting some insurance related ad there right. So, it depends on the ad you want to put it depends on what is the context here. So, and you are the context here like if websites know this is a young guy who is just below 20, 22 years. So, accordingly he would like to show ads to you. So, there are different versions of this. So, we are going to follow largely these three books and some other research material for this. These books are available I will also put it on the course web page. These books, these are all online and you can download them.


All narcissists end up losing.  They rode off into the sunset and you were left broken and destroyed. After they moved on to someone else, they demoted you. They moved you to a lower position usually as a punishment and they put someone else in your place. They replaced you, which caused you to experience overwhelming shock and grief after you have to witness them enjoying this new situation with their new supply. You saw them going on trips and they seemed to be happy and not thinking about you, which affected you. It brought you down, which is why you shouldn't look at what they're doing. It's why you need to stay off their social media, but if you've already seen it, it should wake you up. It should give you a reality check because they tricked you, they got you to open up to them, they got you hooked. They made you believe in a future with them as though everything was going to be fine, but then they ghosted you. They moved on and then they didn't want to talk to you anymore. They changed completely, which left you in a state of confusion.  Because when a narcissist decides to rip off their mask and show you who they really are, it's not a pleasant thing to see because they don't show any compassion for you. Instead, their sole intention is to punish and harm you, to make you feel like you never meant anything to them. Despite all of the time you spent together and everything you invested in them, you left feeling like you never even knew them and that is what shocks and overwhelms you, especially when you see them with someone else and they're laughing and smiling, they're enjoying themselves, they're having a good time and that is when many of you find my videos because you don't understand how they could do something like that. But now you have the knowledge and understanding, you're beginning to learn about what happened to you because before you found my videos it didn't make any sense, but what you need to understand is that they have relationships with more than one person at a time, so you were never exclusive because you were never number one, you were never the only person who mattered to them, they always had other people on the side who they were entertaining, but you were given the illusion of monogamy as though you were the only person they loved and cared about but they were just playing games with you, they were cheating you and playing you for a fool because they're never dealing with just one person at a time, you were one of many people who were being given the same treatment at the same time, they were never exclusive to you. They just knew what to say to make you feel like it was just you and them because you spent so much time with them, you spent hours talking to each other but then they ghosted you because they were busy working on their next victim and then they came back to you again because they needed to ensure that you were still longing and yearning for them because after all of the love and attention they initially gave to you you're still going to be waiting for them, you're not just going to forget about them and move on you're going to hold on to them because you can't accept that it's over you thought this was just the beginning but you weren't the only one that they were doing it to you thought you could have had something with them you thought there was so much potential for growth and development in the future but there wasn't because you were never exclusive to a narcissist you were never the only one so you never had a relationship you never had something special you thought you had something because of what they were displaying to you but you were never theirs which is how they moved on to another situation and they probably already had that person lined up before they even left you and they were giving them the same treatment that they had given to you they were never exclusive to you they're not exclusive to anyone but themselves and what they want and once they've moved on to this new person it's all over unless you're still waiting for them because you're hooked because you're hoping there's still a chance that they could be exclusive to you because you think that no one else can make you feel the way that they do you think you've lost something but the only thing you've lost is the validation their ability to control how you feel when true happiness is generated from within you should be able to make yourself feel that way on your own because that was a vulnerability that the narcissist noticed in you and they were able to take advantage of that and use it to control you all narcissists end up losing they didn't win because you never had anything anyway you never had them but many of you feel like they've won many of you feel like you've lost because you don't want to let go of something you thought belonged to you you thought you lost something but how could you have anything if they were never exclusive to you if they were entertaining other people from the very beginning they just knew how to get you hooked and because they were never really invested in you it was easy for them to shut you down but they didn't get away with what they did to you they don't just move on and continue to advance without you they all go down in the end they are miserable people they're never happy with anything and they always end up being unsuccessful in achieving their goals because they're very neglectful they don't give the proper care and attention to things that should be considered valuable and important so their lack of care and interest for you should reveal to you how things are going to turn out for them because their own attitude, behavior and characteristics ends up coming back to haunt them it comes back to get them in the end because they end up suffering how a person treats you is a direct reflection of how they feel about themselves so if they don't have any concern for you it's because deep down they don't value or love themselves but eventually they over exaggerate their performance they end up doing things they said they would never do they become the very thing they hate and then their lies are exposed and they reach a point where they're unable to continue or achieve anymore they might experience short term success but it won't last for long because nothing good can sustain itself in that type of environment just like a seed needs sunshine and water to grow nothing good can develop in an environment where there is no love or happiness which is why narcissists do not continue to succeed or do well they all go down eventually thank you for watching if you found this video helpful please give it a thumbs up share your thoughts in the comment section hit the subscribe button to receive the notifications if you would like to support the channel you can donate at paypal.me slash Narc Survivor you can book a one on one with me on my website it's Narc Survivor at The God of the UK thank you for watching and I'll talk to you soon