Psyrus the Grate

"Thinking is difficult, that’s why most people judge." -Jung

@LoneStar_PAC Assuming he's anti data center.

James Talarico: "I am proud to say that our campaign has officially become a non-meat campaign. We are only buying vegan products from our local vegan businesses." #TXsen

@JackPosobiec the merch

What do you remember about the 1976 Bicentennial?

“Immigration is not a human right”

A Norwegian neuroscientist spent 20 years proving that the act of writing by hand changes the human brain in ways typing physically cannot, and almost nobody outside her field has read the paper. Her name is Audrey van der Meer. She runs a brain research lab in Trondheim, and the paper that closed the argument was published in 2024 in a journal called Frontiers in Psychology. The finding is brutal enough that it should have changed every classroom on Earth. The experiment was simple. She recruited 36 university students and put each one in a cap with 256 sensors pressed against their scalp to record brain activity. Words flashed on a screen one at a time. Sometimes the students wrote the word by hand on a touchscreen using a digital pen, and sometimes they typed the same word on a keyboard. Every neural response was recorded for the full five seconds the word stayed on screen. Then her team looked at the part of the data most researchers had ignored for years, which is how different parts of the brain were communicating with each other during the task. When the students wrote by hand, the brain lit up everywhere at once. The regions responsible for memory, sensory integration, and the encoding of new information were all firing together in a coordinated pattern that spread across the entire cortex. The whole network was awake and connected. When the same students typed the same word, that pattern collapsed almost completely. Most of the brain went quiet, and the connections between regions that had been alive seconds earlier were nowhere to be found on the EEG. Same word, same brain, same person, and two completely different neurological events. The reason turned out to be something nobody had really paid attention to before her work. Writing by hand is not one motion but a sequence of thousands of tiny micro-movements coordinated with your eyes in real time, where each letter is a different shape that requires the brain to solve a slightly different spatial problem. Your fingers, wrist, vision, and the parts of your brain that track position in space are all working together to produce one letter, then the next, then the next. Typing throws all of that away. Every key on a keyboard requires the exact same finger motion regardless of which letter you are pressing, which means the brain has almost nothing to integrate and almost no problem to solve. Van der Meer said it plainly in her interviews. Pressing the same key with the same finger over and over does not stimulate the brain in any meaningful way, and she pointed out something that should scare every parent who handed their kid an iPad. Children who learn to read and write on tablets often cannot tell letters like b and d apart, because they have never physically felt with their bodies what it takes to actually produce those letters on a page. A decade before her, two researchers at Princeton ran the same fight using a completely different method and ended up at the same answer. Pam Mueller and Daniel Oppenheimer tested 327 students across three experiments, where half took notes on laptops with the internet disabled and half took notes by hand, before testing everyone on what they actually understood from the lectures they had watched. The handwriting group won by a wide margin on every question that required real understanding rather than surface recall. The reason was hiding in the transcripts of what the two groups had actually written down. The laptop students typed almost word for word, capturing more total content but processing almost none of it as they went, while the handwriting students physically could not write fast enough to transcribe a lecture in real time, which forced them to listen carefully, decide what actually mattered, and put it in their own words on the page. That single act of choosing what to keep was the learning itself, and the keyboard had quietly skipped the choosing and skipped the learning along with it. Two studies. Two countries. Same answer. Handwriting makes the brain work. Typing lets it coast. Every note you have ever typed instead of written went into your brain through a thinner pipe. Every meeting, every book highlight, every idea you captured on your phone instead of on paper was processed at half depth. You did not forget those things because your memory is bad. You forgot them because typing never woke the part of the brain that would have made them stick. The fix is the thing your grandmother already knew. Pick up a pen. Write the thing down. The slower road is the faster one.

This is AMAZING

You dont want a yacht. You dont want a big house. You dont want a super car, a $40,000 watch, or shoes you worry about getting dirty. You want free will. You want to wake up naturally on a Tuesday and you want to go to bed when you’re done having fun. You want to say yes to everything that excites you without having to request time off. You want to go to the the gym at noon, in absolutely no hurry. You want to spend 18 hours a day doing what you love. You want to be exactly where you desire being, always. You want to spend as much time with the people you care about as possible. You’re saying you wanna be rich? In what?

When it comes to billionaires my take is the opposite of Leftists: Billionaires SHOULD consume all their wealth: megayachts, English castles, mountains of cocaine, own a dozen homes and 30 cars - do it! Spend it all! The worst thing that can happen is for a billionaire to try to ‘do good in the world’ and shovel money to NGOs for some cause they get excited about. That’s the worst thing that can happen. Charitable donations should be taxed at 500%. A billionaire’s lavish lifestyle poses no threat to me but their misguided ‘good intent’ is absolutely cancerous and potentially civilization ending.

How do you type this out and not feel the weight of unbearable shame crushing your organs

@ScottPresler @catturd2 he needs to veto everything else until this is passed.

@catturd2 Thank you. A truly humbling honor to get a shout-out from President Trump. I don’t take this lightly.

Well-deserved .

@realpeteyb123 "influence on Michael Jackson" as stated

All I see is a creepy dude dancing like a weirdo for a young white child in the desert. Perverted

@alx I eagerly await absolutely nothing happening.

@DanBilzerian @RepFine Blech

This is @RepFine talking about the leader of a foreign country, process that.

I don’t want my streets to be “vibrant” and I don’t want my local “food scene” to be “authentic”. I want my city to be quiet and clean and orderly. I want to go to the diner and get American food. I want my waitress to speak English. The rest of the world sucks.

@CynicalPublius @instapundit Board back to front and that alone changes everything

I have no idea if there is any validity to this rumor, but I hope there is. I'd fly SpiritX if it were as described below.

@marceelias Did you sue these states? Asking for a friend. @GovRonDeSantis @thetoyman1

@GPrime85 gotta slip to the middle on this. some hobbies need calling out.

Nagging women who hen-peck men about our hobbies are undesirable as wives. On the other hand, women who play video games are extremely desirable because it's a fun way to bond and spend time together. Bonus tip: Gamer husbands are excellent in bed because they are thorough, persistant, study how to get good like they're being graded, they want S-Ranks & Platinum Achievements 😉

@r0ck3t23 @ProfTimNoakes There's only one way to test this. Generate a model trained only on info that existed before 1900 and see if it can discover general relativity or design heavier than air machine.

Terence Tao has an IQ above 200. Youngest gold medalist in Math Olympiad history. Fields Medal winner. The greatest living mathematician by nearly any measure. And he just said something most people aren’t ready for. Tao: “This whole era of AI is teaching us that our idea of what intelligence is, is not really accurate.” We spent centuries building civilization on one assumption. That intelligence was sacred. Irreducible. Uniquely ours. The one thing that made the entire human story make sense. Then AI started solving things we swore only we could. Chess. Language. Vision. Math. And every time, we reached for the same defense. That’s not real intelligence. It’s just tricks. Just pattern matching. Just an algorithm. Tao: “You look at how it’s done and it doesn’t feel like intelligence.” So we moved the line. Again. And again. And again. Because intelligence was supposed to feel like something. Something deep. Something we could point to and say… this is what separates us from everything else. But AI kept solving the problems. And that feeling never arrived. Tao: “We were looking for some elusive, intelligent way of thinking and we don’t see it in the tools that actually solve our goals.” Here’s what makes it worse. Large language models work by predicting the next word. One word at a time. No grand architecture. No deep understanding. Just probability. And it works. Tao: “Maybe that’s actually a lot of what humans do as well.” The greatest living mathematician just told you human thought might run on the same machinery. Not some transcendent spark. Pattern recognition. Prediction. One thought, one decision, one word at a time. We built religion around intelligence. Philosophy around it. An entire species identity around it. And a machine running probability just held up a mirror. We didn’t lose intelligence to AI. We just finally saw what it always was. What haunts us isn’t that machines learned to think. It’s that thinking was never what we needed it to be.

Adam Carolla on Gynofascism – Why Nobody's Talking About It

@upstatefederlst and we don't need to fly them around with technology today

@upstatefederlst disagree. 3500 reps (1 per 100k) would map better to the political diversity of the country better than divide by 435. imagine one rep per zip code - a subdivision designed for logistical efficiency given population density. zips are naturally more politically uniform.

The number of representatives in Congress doesn't matter if the numbers are proportioned correctly. We gain nothing by 30,000 representatives except obfuscating government actions. We don't need to pay for the travel and staff of thousands of reps for no reason.