@rodolfosaid6: Maria Shriver reveals Arnold’s child with the housekeeper was under her nose for 14 years#fyp#mariashriver#arnoldschwarzenegger

rodolfosaid6
rodolfosaid6
Open In TikTok:
Region: US
Thursday 06 August 2026 01:06:51 GMT
1466480
24267
1427
2044

Music

Download

Comments

gdlmommy2005
gdlmommy2005 :
Joseph Baena has such a beautiful aura, better than any of his other kids
2026-08-07 22:39:19
633
dietcokeplsss
amber :
And have yall seen the nanny 😭😭😭
2026-08-08 17:51:08
121
noemia268
Noemia :
Never leave a man with any woman at a home
2026-08-06 14:45:34
5836
_cali_raised
Cali raised❌ :
This is the coldest shyt you could do to your wife
2026-08-07 23:13:25
1571
bandu_13
Raider Nation :
ironically he is the only one that look like him
2026-08-08 01:06:13
2137
divestedlilith
divestedlilith :
Tricking your wife to care for your love child? Oh he was dirty for that
2026-08-08 21:33:31
887
veryvelma80
veryvelma80 :
If he did the Nanny, pretty good odds he did others as well.
2026-08-08 14:59:19
2309
faye61406
faye :
I knew about the affair & the child, but, the deception and having his own wife care for his illegitimate child is a betrayal you can never get over! WOW!
2026-08-08 18:56:41
562
mybigfunnypeter
Peter C Bisuito :
Only 1 affair? Doubtful.
2026-08-10 11:46:10
39
lomadelapina
Patrick Reilley :
What is a 200 gyn nanny?
2026-08-12 03:11:02
2
margegrow
Marge Grow-Eppard :
He's a liar and cheater... he's very comfortable in deception
2026-08-06 15:01:37
1256
elsa10558
elsa :
Unforgivable betrayal
2026-08-06 10:10:32
334
d.allen22
D.Allen22 :
This is Telenovela 🤭
2026-08-12 02:59:22
1
billionairebrianna
BillionaireBrianna :
That nanny & Arnold are so disgusting 😤
2026-08-11 08:29:15
23
eva2ev
Eva :
What a evil man.
2026-08-10 18:59:58
18
marleyuribe_official
Marley Uribe :
Arnold didn’t discriminate 🤣
2026-08-12 03:06:48
0
trinimings
MingS❤ :
man shameful
2026-08-12 03:21:18
0
_melissaweaver
Melissa :
He could lie to her everyday for 14 years?!? That’s psychopath behavior
2026-08-12 00:01:15
1
msqtr2
Qqqqq :
I don’t know what hurts more—the affair itself, or the fact that he deceived her for all those years.
2026-08-11 13:56:59
7
perso_kerttu
perso_kerttu :
no respect for him anymore
2026-08-10 07:14:35
68
wanheda58
Wanheda :
All. The. Time.
2026-08-10 20:55:59
29
user409832277
PAE :
Nanny is evil!!!
2026-08-06 12:24:57
1416
millie.stanicky
Millie Stanicky :
He did her so dirty
2026-08-08 02:11:48
57
brendaleeshaddon
Brenda :
Men can’t seem to remain faithful to anyone sadly 😢
2026-08-10 06:34:07
47
lisa.murphy536
Lisa Murphy :
That’s some psycho behavior to have the audacity to have the kid over for years in front of your wife, well her not knowing. I wonder if he had just been up front with her from the beginning if she would have forgiven him. The later is such a serious betrayal. Of course she’d leave him after that.
2026-08-08 18:35:08
89
To see more videos from user @rodolfosaid6, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Why are quants cautious about Monte Carlo simulations?   1. It samples your assumptions, it cannot check them. A wrong model produces ten thousand wrong paths. 2. Many risk simulations still assume Gaussian returns, and many empirical return series show power-law tails. Under a Gaussian, the 1987 crash was a roughly 20 sigma event with tail probability around 10^-89. Reality is clearly heavier-tailed than that. 3. Sampling error shrinks as sigma over root N, but parameter error shrinks as sigma over root T, where T is the length of your data, not the number of runs. A million paths give a very precise answer to an assumed question. 4. The ensemble mean is nobody's path. For multiplicative wealth, the ensemble mean grows like e^(mu t) while the typical path grows at rate mu minus sigma squared over two, so the ensemble mean can rise while the typical path declines. 5. Independent draws have no memory. Real returns show volatility clustering, so iid simulations understate how long and how violent crises are. 6. In low dimension many problems have closed forms or efficient deterministic methods. Monte Carlo earns its keep in high dimension, where classical grid schemes blow up and its standard error stays O(sigma/root N) regardless of dimension. -> Monte Carlo is a valid numerical integrator under the model you feed it; the failures here are failures of inputs and interpretation, not of the method itself. The ergodicity-economics reading of point 4 is debated among economists, the math itself is standard. References: Peters, Nature Physics (2019); Gabaix, Gopikrishnan, Plerou and Stanley, Nature (2003); Mandelbrot, Journal of Business (1963); Merton, JFE (1980); Cont, Quantitative Finance (2001). #finance #quant #trading #algotrading #stocks
Why are quants cautious about Monte Carlo simulations? 1. It samples your assumptions, it cannot check them. A wrong model produces ten thousand wrong paths. 2. Many risk simulations still assume Gaussian returns, and many empirical return series show power-law tails. Under a Gaussian, the 1987 crash was a roughly 20 sigma event with tail probability around 10^-89. Reality is clearly heavier-tailed than that. 3. Sampling error shrinks as sigma over root N, but parameter error shrinks as sigma over root T, where T is the length of your data, not the number of runs. A million paths give a very precise answer to an assumed question. 4. The ensemble mean is nobody's path. For multiplicative wealth, the ensemble mean grows like e^(mu t) while the typical path grows at rate mu minus sigma squared over two, so the ensemble mean can rise while the typical path declines. 5. Independent draws have no memory. Real returns show volatility clustering, so iid simulations understate how long and how violent crises are. 6. In low dimension many problems have closed forms or efficient deterministic methods. Monte Carlo earns its keep in high dimension, where classical grid schemes blow up and its standard error stays O(sigma/root N) regardless of dimension. -> Monte Carlo is a valid numerical integrator under the model you feed it; the failures here are failures of inputs and interpretation, not of the method itself. The ergodicity-economics reading of point 4 is debated among economists, the math itself is standard. References: Peters, Nature Physics (2019); Gabaix, Gopikrishnan, Plerou and Stanley, Nature (2003); Mandelbrot, Journal of Business (1963); Merton, JFE (1980); Cont, Quantitative Finance (2001). #finance #quant #trading #algotrading #stocks

About