MargeeMcC - Coffee Sipper

Last week, the United States refused to participate in the UN’s review of the Global Compact on Migration. The United States objects to the Global Compact on Migration and UN efforts to facilitate replacement migration to the United States and our Western allies.

Yes, I can. The only case report of something that works is infrared light applied to the testicles and lumbar spine, leading to a a 40% improvement over a few months. This strongly indicates it is mitochondrial dysfunction since infrared’s mechanisms are overwhelmingly only known to be mitochondrial in nature. SSRIs are mitochondrial drugs, not mood drugs. Calling them “antidepressants” is total propaganda. What does “depression” have to do with being unable to feel your balls? People who call them “antidepressants” are liars. SSRI withdrawal is mitochondrial dysfunction.

Cambridge gunman ID'd: Tyler Brown In 2020, he fired upon police officers, but Judge Janet Sanders gave him 5 years of prison. FIVE! He has a 20-year criminal record.

Assassinations + political violence are real. My party can’t be the tin foil hat brigade. I was there a table away and I promise you, this was not staged.

Just so everyone is aware: The site is awash today in FALSE claims that the Supreme Court is violating its own rule about not making changes in voting cases too close to an election. The "Purcell" principle is that federal courts should not ORDER changes in voting cases too close to an election date and put the burden on states to figure out how to comply. What has happened today is that the Supreme Court has simply ALLOWED Alabama to decide for itself what it wants to do in the aftermath of the decision in the Louisiana decision last week. Democrats and their supporters are LYING. Plain and simple.

VOILÀ POURQUOI JE SUIS TECHNO-OPTIMISTE. ET POURQUOI JE PENSE QUE C'EST LA SEULE PHILOSOPHIE DE VIE QUI TIENT DEBOUT EN 2026. Je vais être direct. La majorité des gens autour de moi qui ont fait le pari inverse, la décroissance, la sobriété heureuse, le "ralentir", le retour à la terre, le refus du capitalisme, l'écologie punitive, sont déprimés. Pas un peu. Cliniquement. Sous traitement, en burn-out moral, en rupture de sens. Ce n'est pas une coïncidence. C'est mécanique. Quand tu choisis un cadre mental où le monde est un gâteau qui rétrécit, où chaque acte de création est une faute, où ton existence même est un coût pour la planète, tu finis par te détester. C'est le bout logique du raisonnement. Tu as choisi un jeu où tu ne peux pas gagner. Tu as choisi la somme nulle comme philosophie de vie. Et la somme nulle, à l'échelle d'une psyché humaine, ça s'appelle la dépression. Maintenant l'autre côté. Marc Andreessen l'a écrit dans son manifeste : nous sommes les descendants de gens qui ont allumé du feu, dompté des chevaux, traversé des océans, construit des villes, soigné des maladies qui tuaient leurs enfants. La technologie n'est pas l'ennemi de l'humain. C'est ce qui rend l'humain possible à l'échelle. Chaque problème que vous voyez aujourd'hui, climat, énergie, santé, pauvreté, se résout par plus de technologie, pas moins. La stagnation est le seul vrai péché. Et puis il y a Elon. Un type qui, à lui seul, a décidé que l'humanité serait multiplanétaire, électrique, neuronale, et libérée de la bureaucratie. Pas en théorie. En vrai. Avec des fusées qui atterrissent debout, des voitures qui conduisent seules, des implants cérébraux qui font remarcher des paralysés. C'est ça l'optimisme musk-ien. Ce n'est pas un sentiment. C'est une méthode. Tu prends le problème le plus ambitieux que tu peux formuler, tu refuses qu'on te dise que c'est impossible, et tu te dépasses tous les jours jusqu'à ce que la réalité plie. Tous les gosses qui regardent une Falcon 9 atterrir comprennent quelque chose que les commissions de régulation ne comprendront jamais : le futur n'est pas un risque à gérer, c'est un projet à construire. Et derrière, il y a Thiel. Sa thèse de l'antéchrist n'est pas religieuse, elle est mathématique. Un monde qui n'innove plus devient un monde à somme nulle. Un monde à somme nulle redevient tribal. Un monde tribal à l'âge nucléaire s'éteint. Ce n'est pas une opinion politique. C'est une équation. La bureaucratie qui prétend nous protéger du risque construit exactement le scénario d'extinction qu'elle prétend empêcher. Donc voilà ma position, et elle est simple. Je crois qu'on est dans un jeu vidéo. Pas littéralement, quoique. Mais existentiellement, oui. Le but n'est pas de "résoudre" le jeu. Le but est que le jeu soit fun. Que les niveaux soient durs. Qu'on se dépasse. C'est pour ça qu'on aime le sport. C'est pour ça qu'on aime l'art. C'est pour ça que regarder un type courir 100m en 9 secondes ou écouter une symphonie nous arrache des larmes. Parce qu'on reconnaît, au fond, que l'humain est fait pour le dépassement, pas pour le confort. Une société qui marche, c'est une société pensée comme ça. Comme une arène où chacun peut tenter, échouer, recommencer, gagner. Pas comme un hospice où on gère le déclin. Et dans ce jeu, il n'y a rien, rien, de plus épanouissant que de construire des produits pour d'autres humains. Servir. Résoudre un problème que quelqu'un a vraiment. Recevoir un message d'un client qui te dit "merci, ça m'a changé la vie." C'est ça la vraie drogue. Et maintenant que l'IA absorbe la part chiante du boulot, le boilerplate, les tickets, le copier-coller, l'admin, il ne reste que la part noble. Imaginer. Décider. Créer. Le métier de builder n'a jamais été aussi pur qu'aujourd'hui. Donc oui, je suis techno-optimiste. Pas par naïveté. Par lucidité. Parce que l'alternative, la décroissance, la précaution érigée en religion, la bureaucratie comme horizon, ne mène pas à un monde plus doux. Elle mène à un monde plus pauvre, plus tribal, plus violent, et au bout du compte, plus mort. Littéralement. Construire est le seul pari rationnel. C'est aussi le seul qui rend heureux. Le reste, je l'ai vu de mes yeux, c'est la dépression habillée en vertu.

A recent study found that 94% of Canada’s trans-identifying inmates didn’t come out as transgender until after they were arrested. The same study also found that trans-identifying male inmates are 5x more likely to be sex offenders than other male inmates. Locking these men in women’s prisons is a violation of international law and every legitimate human rights organization should say so.

Elon Musk just revealed what’s actually holding AI back. It’s not chips. Not models. Not data. It’s concrete. Someone asked him the obvious question. Why not just build private power plants next to data centers? Bypass the grid entirely. His answer was four words. Musk: “The power plant makers.” There aren’t enough of them. You can design the best chip on earth. Train a frontier model. Raise $10 billion for a hyperscale data center. None of it matters if you can’t power it. Musk: “You can drill down a level further.” GPUs need power. Power needs turbines. Turbines need factories. Factories need permits. Permits need a government that hasn’t paralyzed itself. Every link in the chain is physical. And every one of them is breaking. We can train a frontier model in weeks. We can’t permit a power plant in under five years. The country that invented the assembly line now needs 40 agencies to approve a gas turbine. China doesn’t have this problem. They don’t run 7-year environmental reviews on infrastructure they need tomorrow. They break ground while America requests approval to break ground. The AI race won’t be decided by whoever writes the best algorithm. It’ll be decided by whoever can still build in the physical world. We spent 30 years getting faster in software and slower in steel. Outsourcing manufacturing. Hollowing out supply chains. Treating builders like liabilities instead of assets. Now the bill is due. Every breakthrough in AI is gated by atoms. Steel. Concrete. Turbines that take years to manufacture and decades to approve. The smartest code on earth is worthless without electricity. Musk didn’t give a speech about this. He didn’t need to. He answered one question and the whole infrastructure myth collapsed. “Where do you get the power plants from?” Follow that thread far enough and you stop finding a technology problem. You find a civilization that mastered thinking and forgot how to build.

Your brain physically rewrites itself every time you pick up a pen. Neuroscientists at Norwegian University scanned students' brains while they handwrote letters versus typing the same letters on a keyboard. The results shattered decades of assumptions about how we process information. Handwriting activated massive networks in the sensorimotor cortex, the visual processing centers, and the hippocampus simultaneously. Complex neural symphonies lit up across multiple brain regions, creating rich interconnected pathways between motor control, visual recognition, and memory formation. Typing the same letters? The brain activity looked like someone had dimmed the lights across entire cognitive districts. The neural networks that flourished during handwriting simply went dark. The difference? When you form letters by hand, your brain constructs elaborate spatial maps of each character. The motor cortex learns the precise pressure, angle, and trajectory needed to create an 'A' versus a 'B.' Your visual system tracks the ink flowing from pen to paper in real time. Your parietal lobe integrates hand position with eye movement. Your hippocampus encodes not just what you wrote, but how the writing felt, where you paused, which words required more pressure. Typing activates almost none of that circuitry. You press a key, a letter appears. The motor movement is binary. The visual feedback is uniform. The spatial relationship between thought and symbol gets mediated by a machine that standardizes every character into identical fonts and spacing. Your brain treats these as fundamentally different cognitive tasks. The evolutionary context makes this obvious once you see it. Human hands developed for manipulation, creation, and fine motor control over millions of years. We painted on cave walls, carved bone tools, and shaped clay vessels long before we invented written language. When writing emerged 5,000 years ago, it built on top of existing neural infrastructure that already connected hand movement with symbolic thinking. Keyboards appeared 150 years ago. Touchscreen typing maybe 20 years ago. From an evolutionary timeline perspective, we started using them approximately yesterday. Our brains are still running ancient software that expects physical engagement with symbols. That software produces dramatically different learning outcomes. Students who take handwritten notes consistently outperform students who type the same information on memory tests, comprehension assessments, and creative applications of the material. The difference persists even when researchers account for typing speed, note length, and time spent studying. The act of forming letters by hand forces deeper processing at the moment of information encounter. You cannot handwrite as fast as someone speaks, so your brain must actively filter, summarize, and prioritize information in real time. The motor effort required to form each word creates additional memory traces that typing does not generate. Children who learn to write letters by hand develop reading skills faster than children who learn letters primarily through typing or screen interaction. The sensorimotor experience of creating letterforms helps their brains recognize those same letterforms when they encounter them in text. Adults who handwrite shopping lists, daily schedules, or meeting notes remember the information better than adults who type identical lists into phones or computers. The spatial memory of where you wrote something on a page provides retrieval cues that digital text does not offer. These findings collide directly with how education and work environments have evolved over the past two decades. Schools replaced handwriting instruction with typing classes. Offices converted from paper systems to fully digital workflows. Students take notes on laptops. Professionals draft documents on screens. We optimized for speed and efficiency while accidentally severing the neural pathways that evolution spent millions of years developing. The implications reach beyond memory and learning into fundamental questions about human cognition. If the physical act of forming symbols changes how your brain processes ideas, what happens to thinking itself when you remove the physical component? Digital text is infinitely searchable, instantly editable, and perfectly shareable. But it may be creating brains that process information more superficially, store memories less durably, and connect ideas more weakly than brains that regularly engage in handwriting. The neuroscience suggests we traded cognitive depth for technological convenience without realizing what we were giving up. Some of the most innovative thinkers across history were obsessive handwriters. Darwin kept detailed handwritten journals. Einstein worked through complex theories in handwritten notebooks. Virginia Woolf wrote her novels by hand before transcribing them. Steve Jobs famously took handwritten notes during Apple meetings even as he was building the most advanced computers on Earth. Perhaps they intuited something about the relationship between hand, brain, and insight that we measured in brain scanners but somehow forgot in practice. Your pen is literally a cognitive enhancement device that activates neural networks digital keyboards cannot reach.