Ivana Krumi

May every day be a great day for this banger: m.youtube.com/watch?v=P7JRvw…

@ConceptualJames Horrible

The Left controls almost all of education now. They use a method called "critical pedagogy" (including "culturally relevant teaching") which is derived from something called "education for liberation." These methods selectively target and traumatize learners to make them moldable into a specific consciousness (namely, critical consciousness) and worldview (namely, late Western Marxism). They do not educate at all. Education is seen as a means to the real end of "awakening" and activation.

@Empty_America Bleak

I hated elementary school, but I recently had the chance to observe it, and it's nothing but a direct preparation for the office, which is the life most avidly aspire to. There are assignments, you need to look busy, they make power-point type stuff, there are rules and "HR."

A Wharton economist ran a randomized controlled trial on almost a thousand high school students in Turkey. The result was so brutal for the AI-in-education narrative that it had to be peer-reviewed by PNAS before people would believe it. Her name is Hamsa Bastani. She teaches operations and information at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, and the study she published in 2025 alongside her co-authors is one of the cleanest experiments anyone has run on what AI actually does to learning when you remove it from the equation and check what is left. The setup was a randomized controlled trial, the same methodology used in clinical drug trials. Nearly a thousand high school math students in Turkey were split into three groups and put through four sessions of ninety minutes each. One group practiced with GPT Base, a standard ChatGPT-4 interface that could answer any question directly. One group practiced with GPT Tutor, a version of the same model that had been prompted to guide students with hints rather than hand them the answer. One group practiced with nothing but their textbook and their own head. During the practice sessions, the AI groups looked like a miracle. The GPT Base group solved 48% more problems than the students working alone. The GPT Tutor group solved 127% more. Every administrator looking at those numbers would have written a press release about the transformative power of AI in education and moved on. Then the actual exam came, and AI was not allowed. The students who had practiced with GPT Base scored 17% worse than the students who had practiced alone. Seventeen percent worse, despite having solved nearly half again as many problems in the sessions leading up to it. The students who had struggled the most, who had sat with the confusion and worked through it without a tool to rescue them, were now the only ones who could actually do the math when it counted. Bastani's team read through the chat logs to understand what had actually been happening during the practice sessions, and the answer was exactly what the exam results had already implied. The GPT Base group had not been learning. They had been extracting answers and moving on, and every moment that felt like understanding was actually the model doing the cognitive work while the student's brain waited for the next problem to arrive. The paper describes it precisely: without guardrails, students attempt to use GPT-4 as a crutch during practice, and subsequently perform worse on their own. The detail that should follow every conversation about AI in education is the one buried in the post-test survey results. The students who had relied on AI the most during practice were also the most confident they had understood the material. The tool had not just failed to teach them. It had convinced them they had learned something they had not, which is a different kind of failure entirely and a much harder one to correct because the student has no idea it is happening. The crutch had made them confident and weak at the same time.

@CEBKCEBKCEBK This is horrible

Last night grad students in prestigious hard science programs were discussing potential moves to DC. I said one reason we left was crime—several serious incidents in a row—but that its homicide rate’s fallen fully 75% since. They had as much trouble with crime stats as blacks. One smugly said she’d lived in big European city so she could handle presumably parochial concerns about small-time DC’s presumably small-time crime problems; I showed her that DC’s homicide rate was literally over 20 times higher than that of the city she thought surely had worse crime—but I emphasized again that homicide rates in DC are literally down 75% since peak woke, particularly thanks to things like Trump’s national guard occupation, & anyway it’s mostly black-on-black, so she should, again, be fine. Instead of reflecting at all on how clearly mistaken her worldview had just been shown to be on this exact issue, she immediately pivoted into chimping at me for mentioning Trump in any positive light, because he organized one riot in DC so it’s ostensibly hypocritical of me to say that everyday crime risk from living in DC is empirically down relative to the Biden years, & then claimed I should be afraid of crime in our solid-blue lily-white college town, because it’s full of blue voters & so it’d be ostensibly inconsistent of me to be concerned about now-receding woke spikes in the black homicide rate if I didn’t also think white homicides were high & rising in white-blue areas, & then she bizarrely threatened to fight me, & went way off the deep end. Another stem guy then similarly harangued me in similarly retarded catty ways. We make fun of black people who deny racial gaps in crime rates for being unable to understand extremely basic stuff: eg how they all seem to be parroting some script which teaches that even the idea of looking at homicides “per capita” is inherently “disinformation”; & how it seems like they’re only making these retarded incoherent empirically-backwards args at us for the imagined benefit of some woke imaginary third-party audience or authority whom they want head-pats from. But stem grad students are obviously just as dumb & pig-headed when the topic of their pet blacks comes up, &/or when they finally meet one person who tells them that he voted for the guy who got the most votes (in the state & the nation) in the most recent presidential election. They smugly make estimates that are off by well over an order of magnitude, & when politely corrected immediately pivot onto mixing-up trends with levels (“if he thinks the crime rate is high, then he must think it’s rising, no matter how many times he says otherwise,”), & then to calling me racist for pointing out black homicide rates are ~10X white rates (esp correcting for clearance disparities) while also forgetting about my racism enough to simultaneously claim I think lily-white solid-blue towns must have bad crime rates if I’m against how Democrats in mixed cities empirically worsened black violence, & then randomly bringing up Jan 6th as ostensibly relevant for crime risks from everyday living in DC just because they think it was bad in completely unrelated ways & thus can ostensibly own me as a Trump voter for an imaginary finger-snapping woke audience of teachers & blacks. Journalism, internet, wokeness, democracy, etc have brain-rotted even “women in stem” to making crazy hysterical false incoherent bizarre incurious args for their ideology, which their ideology will never gaze back thru the screen or ballot or news or whatever to notice (much less reward), even to the point of thinking that waifs can beat up fit guys (& should threaten to) for talking bluntly (but apparently not bluntly enough) about how blacks are way more criminally violent than whites. Anyone who follows orders this obediently, with so little curiosity or thought, can ofc be technicians, clerks, or secretaries. But we call them “scientists”—& wonder why science has slowed. Replace with AIs

@gyrfalc63587709 @flowidealism Having to ask permission to go to the bathroom at that age must be the most soul-crushing experience of all

@flowidealism It is obscene how men in golfcarts roam school campuses treating seventeen year old students like prison escapees if they step out of the school.

There's a whole book called The Case Against Adolescence. Adolescence was created as a category in the 20th century. Prior to the 20th century, we didn't even have the category of adolescence. Andrew Carnegie, Ben Franklin, John Muir, and Thomas Edison all began their professional careers at 13. Back in the 18th and 19th centuries in the U.S. and in much of the world, teenagers had pretty much adult-level responsibilities and started their lives. One of the biggest flaws in our society is the infantilization of adolescence. Teen suicides have increased three times since the 1950s. I think education, traditional school, is humiliating for many kids who don't happen to be good at school. The goal is for every TSE student to be doing adult-level professional work or better by the age of 18. I've had students start companies and write novels. I had one who was a day trader, somebody else who did a website for the American Idol finalist, had a student who did a music festival in Austin, a three-day music festival, 80,000 budget.

@dowellml Ironically, Harvard was lax on grading from its very founding. “A gentleman’s B” was a guarantee for showing up. People grumbled about it for almost 400 years but did nothing until now, apparently. We all can try to guess why

“Yes you did A level work, but I had a quota of 4 As, so you got bumped down to a B+.” It’s never surprising when “smart” people can be entirely anti-intellectual, anti-expertise, and anti-methodology due entirely to ideological bias and motivations.

What the "principled" Republicans will never understand is that politics is not just a game of principle. It's about power. You either have the power or you don't. If your "principles" require that you voluntarily hand power or surrender the narrative to the side that wants to destroy everything you love, than your principles mean nothing.

@RobCodesALot @DrInsensitive It is - for those who are up for reelection

@DrInsensitive Your point is articulated well and I can't disagree with your premise. However, I am left wondering why this same voracity isn't used against those in the Senate that are essentially using the same tactics to block appointments and key legislation

I like Massie, but here is what's left out of today's frenzy: Massie voted repeatedly against e-verify, saying it was government overreach. That casts a new light on his vote against the BBB. He said the bill's border enforcement was not important enough to justify its pork spending. Clearly, he believes limiting government at EVERY turn -a goal I wholeheartedly embrace- is more important than excluding the foreigners who will inevitably vote to expand government. None of Massie's principles will matter after 50 million turd-world immigrants move in and start voting, because few of them are Republicans and virtually zero of them are libertarians. Immigrants will simply vote to overturn Massie's policies, then they will do what they always do: Use the government to plunder the other tribe. We are the other tribe. I liked Massie, but he had to go.

@DrInsensitive Exactly. He refused to understand what time it is

@Cernovich Anthropic is positioning itself as a sort of left wing Palantir and will be given billions in government contracts in the next Democrat administration. They are in bed with Amazon, Google, and the rest of the blue team.

I have heard people claim that the reaction people are having against AI is the same reaction people had when the internet started to be introduced. And as someone who was there at the time, I can tell you NO IT FUCKING WASN'T.

Why did Massie lose tonight? Massie went from principled libertarian during COVID, to GOP leadership lapdog under McCarthy, to anti-Trump Epstein obsessive in 2025 after tweeting about that issue a whopping three (3) times in the decade prior. The nail in the coffin for him was voting against OBBB in 2025 because, according to Massie, it did too much to secure the border. Trump mercilessly trashed Massie in 2020–calling him a “disaster” for America and Kentucky and saying he should be thrown out of the GOP entirely—but Massie easily swatted that away and won 81-19, so you can’t say he only lost because of Trump. He went toe-to-toe with Trump on COVID in 2020 and won overwhelmingly. Massie lost because he went from being perceived as a quirky but lovable nerd who seemed to genuinely believe everything he said, to looking like a clout-chasing influencer who cared more about getting TV time with Democrats on an issue he clearly never cared about until five minutes ago than he did about representing his voters. We’ll never know what caused the apparent personality change—maybe it was the death of his wife, maybe it was the McCarthy race followed by McCarthy’s ouster, or maybe it was a desire for notoriety or media acclaim and a lucrative podcasting career outside of Congress—but the drastic change was undeniable, as was the seeming lack of interest in much of anything happening in Kentucky. Blame Trump, blame Israel, blame Epstein, blame the tragic death of a spouse, I don’t care. But you cannot just wave away 2020 Massie going face-to-face with the Trump machine and winning in a rout only to get smoked six years later. Massie’s voters didn’t really change all that much, but he did, and they noticed.

@SeanIsMe123 @Pro__Trading Would have been the same this time if he were a team player

@Pro__Trading And Thomas Massie never went up against an opponent, he always just got the seat handed to him so... that could be part of this as well

Trump picked a random guy nobody's ever heard of who didn't participate in any debates and wiped out seven term incumbent Thomas Massie by what looks to be double digits. Incredible. Trump's political power is at it's apex.

@Just_Terry17 @Pro__Trading His power aligns with the will of the American people.

It's not Trump's political power. It's the American people getting sick and tired of politicians more interested in a PR schtick instead of doing what they were elected to do. The guy who wears a federal debt counter on his lapel hasn't said word one about the hundreds of billions of massive fraud against American taxpayers. He's more interested in name-calling and exploiting SA victims for political gain.

I am going to explain this as simply as I can for those that still don't understand. You do not get the results you got in Indiana, Louisiana, and Kentucky with a sitting President in the low 30s approval rating. Therefore, the polls are fake. The reality shows Trump's approval is very high. What the final number is no one knows because the polls are so fake anymore, but it's certainly not in the 30s. The results tell you that in flashing neon letters. Everyone in power that believed the polls should immediately do a gut check and change course because the media siren polls are driving you all into the rocks.

@MaryBowdenMD This would be the biggest game changer

We should make doxycycline over the counter.

When you tell a Massie nasty that their high clown voted against the OBBB, they get a bit defensive. It's hard to support a person that voted no to kicking 1.6 million illegals off of medicare. It's hard to support a person that voted with every democrat to raise your taxes. It's hard to support a person that voted No to fully funding border security and immigration enforcement for the next 4 years. It's hard to support a person who says one thing and votes a different way. Or sure, they will say but he voted against it for X, y, or Z and that he really really fingers crossed supported all of the above but he just voted No because of debt or some other stupid reason. It doesn't matter why he voted No on all of the above. He can tell you sweet little lies on why he voted No but he cant lie about the fact he voted NO to all of the above. The why doesn't matter. What matters is the vote. If Massie was sucessful the OBBB would have failed. The gop would have been unable to pass anything remotely favorable to MAGA because they would have then needed dem votes in the senate and after 2 shutdowns we see how that would have went. If Massie was sucessful at defeating the OBBB, the entire election would have been null and void as far as codifying any of the MAGA agenda. He voted NO on the most consequential bill in a generation. He voted with every single dem to deny much of the MAGA agenda from being codified. Forget the pinecone jokes, the boner phone cringe, all the other NO votes and all the sweet little lies. That one NO vote on the OBBB is reason enough for him to be excommunicated from the gop party in DC. It was a career defining moment for him and something he can't sweep under the rug. He voted NO to all of the MAGA agenda within that bill. There would be no funds for a secure border. Ice would be defunded right now as the dems shutdown the DHS for months. All deportations would have stopped if Massie was successful with his NO vote. 77 million people voted for a secure border and deportations and Massie voted No on the one major bill that would deliver those things. He voted NO and slapped 77 million votes in the face. That type of stupidity deserves consequences.

@priscialva Good

SCOOP: The Trump administration is proposing increasing the refugee admissions ceiling for fiscal year 2026 to 17,500 for White South Africans, according to an emergency determination sent to Congress and obtained by CNN. That's an increase of 10,000.

If you want to scare the heck — peacefully — out of every other sitting United States Senator, then help defeat John Cornyn on May 26th. Incumbent Senators just don’t lose primaries — it’s very rare. Defeating Cornyn would send shockwaves across the country.