SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " kind " 1,259 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
My Most Anticipated Video Game Of 2026 Might Be This Simple Vibes-Based Lanesplitting Indie
"LANESPLIT" is a simple game from a one-person developer, and at my advanced age of 29 that's the kind of game I have the time and energy to play after work.
‘Grinch’ Star Taylor Momsen Sports Original Costume 25 Years Later
Taylor Momsen, who played a young Cindy Lou Who in the 2000 film “The Grinch,” is getting into the Christmas spirit (literally) by sporting her original costume 25 years later. “It still… kind of… fits,” she wrote.
This new 3D chip could break AI’s biggest bottleneck
Researchers have created a new kind of 3D computer chip that stacks memory and computing elements vertically, dramatically speeding up how data moves inside the chip. Unlike traditional flat designs, this approach avoids the traffic jams that limit today’s AI hardware. The prototype already beats comparable chips by several times, with future versions expected to go much further. Just as important, it was manufactured entirely in a U.S. foundry, showing the technology is ready for real-world production.
What is the goal now?
Let’s start with the low bar to clear: as long as our coach doesn’t assault a small child with a projectile, this season will be mostly ok. Of course, Xavier could always schedule a throwaway game so they could sternly pretend to have disciplined the coach. That kind of behavior is usually saved for guys […]
Science funding was hit in 2025. What does that mean for the future? : Consider This from NPR
2025 was a hard year for science. The Trump administration upended federal funding for all kinds of scientific pursuits, slashing budgets across agencies like NASA, NIH and NOAA. NPR's Rob Stein and Katia Riddle spoke to scientists and officials who worry that those cuts could cause the United States to lose its competitive edge as a global hub for research and innovation, and steer future generations away from careers in science. For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.This episode was produced by Michael Levitt, with audio engineering by Zo vanGinhoven. It was edited by Sarah Handel, Scott Hensley and Amina Khan. Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun.
Nine mental-health tips for a happier 2026
Regardless of any resolutions you may have for 2026, one thing is for sure: Everyone wants to have a happy new year.While losing weight or saving money may be great goals, the most straightforward path to happiness is caring for your mental and emotional health. A robust body of research shows that simple cognitive and behavioral strategies can reliably boost happiness and reduce stress – and they’re generally free and accessible to all.These strategies don’t have to be super time-consuming, but they do require intention: They only work if you do them.Here, psychologist Valentina Ogaryan, PhD, clinical director of the Simms/Mann UCLA Center for Integrative Oncology, shares her top tips for cultivating more calm, centeredness and happiness in the new year (or anytime):Make time for playPlay isn’t just for kids, and it’s far from frivolous. The National Institute for Play says engaging in silliness, fun and just-for-pleasure activities reduces stress and increases optimism and resilience. A recent review also found that play improves mental health.“Adults can benefit from play as much as children,” Dr. Ogaryan says, “not just as a reward, but something that helps regulate.”So go ahead and dance with your dog, build something with Legos, tell a joke, sing karaoke or do anything else that feels like fun. Don’t worry about being productive, just enjoy yourself. And, if you can, opt for more analog play, Dr. Ogaryan suggests, as a respite from our ever-more-digital world. Move your bodyWhether you dance, ski, do yoga, play pickleball, ride a bike, roller-skate, hike or lift weights, physical movement benefits overall happiness and well-being. A 2018 review study of more than 1.2 million adults in the U.S. found that doing any kind of exercise was “significantly and meaningfully associated” with better self-reported mental health.The sweet spot was 45 minutes of movement three to five times a week, but even short bursts of physical activity can boost brain health, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.“Movement helps support mood and regulate the nervous system,” Dr. Ogaryan says.Plus: exercise can improve sleep quality, and sleep is essential for mental health.Prioritize sleep“Sleep plays a major role in managing stress,” Dr. Ogaryan says. Research shows that lack of sufficient sleep increases the risk of various diseases, including depression.While stress can interfere with sleep, practicing good sleep hygiene can make logging ZZ’s easier. That means maintaining a consistent bedtime; keeping the bedroom cool, dark and quiet; and avoiding social media, news and stimulating shows before bed.Consume lessWe live in a consumer culture, inundated by endless streams of content and advertising everywhere we go, which makes it easy to get overstimulated.“Something really helpful for stress reduction is to simply consume less,” Dr. Ogaryan says – less news, less social media, less information, less noise, less screen time. “It’s about reducing the input,” she says.Consider setting a maximum number of news articles per day, for example, or a time limit on scrolling. Maybe even go device free for an afternoon or a whole day.Practice present-moment awarenessWith so much coming at us all the time, focusing on the here and now can make life feel more manageable, Dr. Ogaryan says: “When everything feels super overwhelming, when everything feels larger than life, let’s make our world a little bit smaller for that moment in time.”She suggests taking things one day, or even one hour, at a time. Ask yourself: What’s my next right action? Release the need to know how everything turns out and liberate yourself from having to handle everything right now. Let the future take care of itself and just focus on the current moment. Then the next one. Have a daily anchorFrom work to the daily commute to family and life responsibilities, our days can feel jam-packed. Dr. Ogaryan recommends creating a centering daily anchor that can fit into even the busiest day.Maybe it’s a 10-minute walk during your lunch break or mindfully enjoying your coffee in the morning. Let your anchor adapt to your needs each day, she says, but be intentional about using that time to ground yourself and calm your nervous system. You might even say to yourself, “I choose this walk to help me become centered,” or “My day already feels stressful, so I’m going to take the next 10 minutes to enjoy this cup of coffee, feel the warm mug in my hand and just be present.” Having an anchor won’t erase the busy-ness from your day, but it will allow you to approach it more calmly.Be kind to yourselfMost of us have a harsh inner critic in our heads who works overtime. But that critical voice only increases our stress, triggering the same fight-or-flight response as caustic words from another person.To feel happier, we need to replace that inner critic with a kinder, more compassionate voice, Dr. Ogaryan says. Studies show that self-compassion is a source of eudaimonic happiness – the kind of happiness associated with purpose and meaning in life.While our knee-jerk reaction may be to self-criticize – “How could you let it get to this point? You didn’t manage your time well and now the project is going to be late. You’re so inept.” – we fare better mentally by treating ourselves with kindness, like we would a friend. That might sound like, “You’ve got a lot on your plate, but you are capable and you’ll get it done. I believe in you.”We may think that speaking kindly to ourselves means letting ourselves off the hook, so we end up becoming lazy do-nothings. But research shows the opposite: People who are self-compassionate are more likely to try harder in the face of failure and ultimately reach their goals.You can thank your inner critic for its good intentions, but resolve to talk to yourself in a kind, compassionate voice.Connect with othersHumans are social animals built for connection. Stress can be isolating and cause us to withdraw, but connecting with others is a salve for the psyche, Dr. Ogaryan says.“We know that not all relationships are always easy, but if we can think about intentional, nourishing connection – even in really small doses – it could really help center us,” she says.Take a moment to laugh with your colleagues, hug your pet, have a conversation with a friend or smile at the barista making your coffee. A study found that even tiny interactions with casual acquaintances and strangers decreases loneliness and improves happiness and well-being.Seek supportIf you try these practices and happiness remains elusive, or if you can’t access the wherewithal to follow these tips, seek support from your physician or a therapist. Mental health conditions are among the most common health issues in the U.S. and around the world – more prevalent than diabetes or heart disease. One in five people in the U.S. experiences a mental illness each year, with depression and anxiety the most common, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.“We can all think about these tips,” Dr. Ogaryan says. “But it’s important to recognize if you’ve done everything you can and you’re still really struggling, it’s really important to seek help.”
The disunity of science is a feature, not a bug
Mathematical models wield miraculous power, but mistaking them for reality has trapped science in a destructive quest for a “Theory of Everything.” Physicist and philosopher Ragner Fjelland argues that this leads to bloated, Frankenstein theories kept alive by clumsy, ad-hoc amendments, which reduce rather than boost science’s power. Fjelland calls for a radical shift in our attitude: we must reorientate towards creating entirely new theories, celebrating rather than lamenting disunity and diversity in science. Science, from the scientific revolution in the seventeenth century to the present day, has more or less developed in a “reductionist” way. The fundamental assumption is that all sciences may be ordered in a hierarchy that can be represented as an upside-down pyramid. At the top we find the human sciences, and at the bottom physics. Strong (or “ontological”) reductionism maintains that all theories at one level can be completely reduced to the lower level, all the way down to theories of atoms and elementary particles, or whatever is “at the bottom.” In the end, all diversity in the world can be unified in one fundamental theory. Hence it is called a final theory, or a Theory of Everything.One of the central figures in developing the idea of a Theory of Everything is the Dutch theoretical physicist Gerard 't Hooft, who received a Nobel Prize in physics in 1999 for his work. He emphasizes the non-empirical status of the theory:There exists no closely resembling alternative theory. This means that any slight change brought about in the rules would make the theory unlikely or inelegant. The theory will be a "package deal": take it, or leave it. This should hold both for the local laws and for the boundary conditions.This endeavor is not new. On the contrary, it goes all the way back to the birth of Western philosophy 2,500 years ago. The Babylonians made regular astronomical observations during a period of 600 years, from 747 BCE until 150 ACE. They developed mathematical techniques to predict astronomical phenomena, but they made no attempts at explaining them. However, the Greeks developed models, both material and theoretical, to explain the observed phenomena.The best example is Plato’s late dialogue Timaeus. Here he introduces a divine craftsman, the Demiurge, who has constructed the universe according to an original plan. Plato seems to have thought that the original plan is what is actually real, while the material world is merely an imperfect realization of it. He therefore does not, in the Timaeus, reconstruct the material universe, but the original plan, which can then be used to explain the material universe.Plato’s aim in producing a theoretical model is to reconstruct the original plan. That is what he carries out in Timaeus—and some modern physicists have embarked on the same project. For example, Einstein’s basic attitude is reflected in the title of Abraham Pais’ biography: “Subtle is the Lord...,” echoing Einstein’s comment, “Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not.” In an interview Einstein compared our situation to a child who enters a huge library. The child knows that someone has written the books, but he does not know the languages in which they are written. He suspects that there is a mysterious order, but he does not know what it is.___“We have all been working in what Husserl called the Galilean style; that is, we have all been making abstract mathematical models of the universe to which at least the physicists give a higher degree of reality than they accord the ordinary world of sensation.”Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize in Physics (1979)___This Platonist view is contrary to a widespread impression of science, symbolized by the picture of the “father” of modern science, Galileo Galilei, with his telescope. According to this impression, Galileo liberated himself from the dominating metaphysics of his day—basically Aristotelian philosophy—and constructed a telescope that he directed towards the sky, showing that Jupiter has four moons. He also performed experiments with bronze balls rolling down inclined planes and found the law of freely falling bodies.However, in other cases Galileo emphasized the unreliability of our senses. It is easy to see why. He defended Copernicus’ heliocentric hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, we are not at rest at the center of the universe, but moving at a tremendous speed through space. Why don’t we observe this motion? Galileo praises Copernicus because “with reason as his guide he resolutely continued to affirm what sensible experience seemed to contradict.” In other places he directly refers to Plato. SUGGESTED VIEWING The quest for a final theory With Michio Kaku Galileo’s Platonism goes back to his early writings. In The Assayer, published as early as 1623, Galileo compared the universe to a grand book that is written in the language of mathematics, and “its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it.” Therefore, things that cannot be described by mathematics—for example, colors, smells and odors—are not real. They are merely subjective.This division into subjective and objective, advocated by Galileo and his younger contemporary René Descartes, is normally associated with a mechanistic world view, which is regarded as the opposite of Platonism. When we reduce something to, for example, molecules and atoms, we move “downwards.” In contrast, the Platonist moves “upwards,” to abstract entities. However, it only shows that when we address fundamental questions, we should be careful in applying everyday spatial metaphors like “up” and “down.”___Nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world.___The endeavor of finding a Theory of Everything has been heavily criticized. In 2006, the theoretical physicist Lee Smolin published “The Crisis in Fundamental Physics.” He argued that one of the most fundamental principles of science is that we should only regard theories as scientific if we have the possibility to show that they are false by experiments. Although he did not refer to Karl Popper, other critics have referred to Popper and argued that a theory is not scientific if it cannot be falsified (see for example Ellis & Silk 2014).These were not the first physicists to be anti-reductionists. In 1972, the journal Science published an article by the physicist Philip Anderson with the title “More Is Different.” This is the kind of article a scientist would normally write only after he has won a Nobel Prize. However, Anderson won the Nobel Prize for physics five years later, in 1977. The article is amazing, not primarily because it argues in favor of anti-reductionism in general, but because it argues for anti-reductionism within physics itself. Anderson’s conclusion was:At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry.We may say that Plato started the “unity of science movement,” based on Euclidean geometry as the model of all knowledge. A distinguishing mark of geometry is that all possible constructions can be reduced to a few fundamental principles. We have to acknowledge that this approach has limitations. In general, we can easily model technological systems. In addition, we may construct simplified and idealized models that capture important aspects of systems, from various perspectives and for various purposes. But nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world. In a complex system, each level has its distinct, emergent, properties that are characteristic of this level. Therefore, a complex system should be investigated at different levels and from different perspectives. Instead of exclusively pursuing a scientific ideal based on the unity of science, we should acknowledge the diversity—or even the disunity—of science.
Indiana twins bridge political divide with kindness: ‘You have one family’
Indiana twins Nick and Nathan Roberts prioritize kindness and civility, and say ‘we never argue about politics’
iRobot founder says company's bankruptcy revealed a new kind of competitor: 'The Chinese fast follower'
As iRobot's founder Colin Angle looks back on its path to bankruptcy, he says it was hard to overcome competitors in China.
'A one-of-a-kind gift': Last-minute holiday shoppers boost Sacramento's local businesses
For small business owners, this final weekend is about more than just sales; it's an opportunity to make a lasting impression.
Brent Venables embraces Oklahoma’s biggest stage yet
Norman is ready. Venables believes Oklahoma is built for this kind of night.
Full Episode: Recapping the 2025 Year in NYS Politics
On This Week's Edition -- It's been quite the eventful year in New York politics - from a competitive mayoral race in New York City to controversial policy items and a late state budget debated at the state Capitol. We'll dive into the headlines that drove the year with POLITICO'S Katelyn Cordero, Bloomberg's Raga Justin and Jimmy Vielkind, of WNYC, Gothamist and the New York Public News Network.
The lasting harm of the politics of disconnection
Ours is a nation of small kindnesses and large cruelties.
Tom Durkin | The journey: People over politics
“Everyone’s on a journey,” Dianna Hill used to remind me gently whenever I got upset with what someone did or didn’t do. Maybe 5’2” in heels and just barely topping 100 pounds, Dianna had the look and soft voice of the perfect kindergarten teacher. She taught 8th-grade algebra. Dianna was empathy personified. She could feel […]
This CFP first round kind of stinks. Here's why I can live with that
The 12-team CFP has been a gift for the sport – just not for its postseason. The regular season got better. The CFP is still weak.
Where race and politics meet
Kinder Institute students learn new perspectives studying abroad in Cape Town.
A new era for sports communication at UNC Hussman | UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media
As director of UNC Hussman’s Sports Communication Focus Program, Distinguished Associate Professor of Sports Communication Livis Freeman is building on the work of the school’s legendary Distinguished Professor for Sports Communication John Sweeney. Sweeney, who retired last year, developed one of the most respected sports communication programs in the country. Freeman, now in his 12th year at the school, is launching an ambitious expansion of the program that is transforming how UNC prepares students for careers in sports media. The most visible change came this fall with a reimagining of “MEJO 377: Sports Communication.” Previously offered as two sections with 30 students each, the course expanded to 96 students and welcomed former UNC basketball star and NBA veteran Tyler Hansbrough as the co-instructor with Freeman, bringing real world professional experience directly into the classroom every week. The course has been a huge success. Students have participated in recording a podcast with Hansbrough and learned from an impressive lineup of guest speakers. Steve Kirschner, UNC’s senior associate director of athletics for communications, was the first in the course’s guest speaker series, followed by UNC Hussman alumni including Kaitlyn Schmidt ’23 from Bleacher Report, Deaton Bell ’90 from Turner Sports and Becca Royer ’19 from the Philadelphia 76ers. Travis Tygart, CEO of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, also shared his insights with the class. The highlight of the semester came when Roy Williams, who coached Hansbrough and the Tar Heels to a national championship in 2009, visited the classroom. Former UNC men’s basketball players Luke Maye and Marcus Ginyard showed up to support their former coach and Hansbrough, creating an unforgettable experience as Williams entertained students with stories and insights that captivated the room. Student demand has been overwhelming. The course reached capacity within two days of registration opening, with more than 40 students on the waitlist. “Students want to learn from people who have actually lived these experiences,” Freeman said. “Tyler shares insights into media relations, broadcast production and athlete communications that you simply can’t get from a textbook.” The model proved so successful that the school secured funding to continue it for the next five years, with a different former professional athlete co-teaching each fall. The school’s curriculum committee approved a proposal to expand the course to 150 to 200 students starting in fall 2026. This change will make it an introductory course accessible to students from across the University, transforming it into a showcase course for the entire campus. The course redesign represents just one piece of a broader sports communication program overhaul. This fall, the curriculum committee approved “MEJO 390: Sports Play by Play,” the first course of its kind at UNC. Limited to 10 advanced students, the course will be taught by Matt Krause, the current voice of UNC women’s basketball and an ACC Network broadcaster. Students will call actual games across multiple sports including women’s softball, soccer, volleyball, field hockey and lacrosse, as well as men’s soccer and lacrosse. They will also shadow broadcasts of men’s and women’s basketball games. “The sports broadcasting industry is exploding with streaming platforms and conference networks creating unprecedented demand,” Freeman said. The course emerged directly from student advocacy, led by Anna Laible ’26 and others who pushed for hands-on broadcasting experience. Professional equipment has been acquired, partnerships with UNC Athletics are in place and a soft launch began this semester with three experienced students calling games to test the system. The program’s growth extends into other specialized areas as well. Last spring, Stembler Professor Charlie Tuggle launched a new sports event management and hospitality course in partnership with On Location, a company that manages major sporting event experiences. The course provided students with opportunities to travel to the Super Bowl and NFL Draft, and Tuggle plans to take a group to the 2026 Milan Olympics this spring. Looking ahead to spring 2026, Associate Professor Ryan Thornburg will debut a sports data visualization course, adding another dimension to the program’s skill-building offerings. The curriculum expansion reflects the increasingly diverse career paths available in sports media, from traditional journalism and broadcasting to digital analytics and strategic communication. The program is also diving into one of college athletics’ most transformative developments: Name, Image and Likeness rights. Freeman’s “MEJO 466: Sports Marketing” class collaborated last spring with Associate Professor Gary Kayye’s “MEJO 371: Advertising Creative” class on a project with UNC’s Carolina NIL group to help rebrand their organization. That same semester, Kayye’s class envisioned Chapel Thrill, UNC football’s new pregame concert and entertainment experience. And Shaun Anderson, the school’s Knight Chair in Sports, Race and Media, continues to explore the broader implications of NIL through his research and teaching. These NIL-focused initiatives give students direct exposure to the business side of college athletics at a moment when the landscape is rapidly evolving. “Our students aren’t just learning about these changes,” Freeman said. “They’re actively helping shape how schools and athletes navigate them.” The transformation of UNC Hussman’s sports communication program reflects a broader philosophy about how to prepare students for careers in a rapidly changing industry. By bringing in professional practitioners like Hansbrough and Krause, partnering with industry leaders like On Location and ACC Network, and engaging with current issues like NIL, the program ensures students graduate with both theoretical knowledge and practical experience. For alumni who remember the foundations John Sweeney built, the expansion represents an evolution rather than a departure. The program still emphasizes strong reporting, strategic communication, ethical communication and critical thinking. But now it also offers students the chance to call live games, work on real NIL campaigns and learn directly from former professional athletes. “We’re not just teaching students about sports media,” Freeman said. “We’re giving them the tools, experiences and connections to actually build careers in it.” With new courses launching, professional partnerships deepening and enrollment expanding, UNC Hussman’s sports communication program is positioning itself as a national leader in preparing the next generation of sports media professionals. For current students, the message is clear: if you’re interested in sports communication, there’s never been a better time to be at UNC Hussman. And for the hundreds of students trying to get off waitlists and into these new courses, the school is working to create more opportunities. The program John Sweeney built is growing in ways that honor his legacy while meeting the demands of a new era in sports media.
'Fallout' is bleak but funny science fission : Pop Culture Happy Hour
Fallout is based on a hugely successful video game series known for blending a sardonic, very dark comedic sensibility, and violence. The series is set in the game's post-apocalyptic world – an America divided into factions wrestling for control of an irradiated wasteland. When the hopeful Lucy (Ella Purnell) steps out of the comfortable life she's known in an underground vault, the world she's confronted with is harsh, brutal, merciless – and kinda funny. Fallout just returned for a second season on Prime Video, so today we’re revisiting our conversation about the show.
Amazon’s Kindle Scribe Colorsoft won’t replace your notebook — or your Kindle
It’s also $630.
Critical Amazon Kindle Hack Confirmed — What You Need To Know
A hacker found a way to access Amazon accounts using a malicious book downloaded to a Kindle. What you need to know about the ebook attack.
Burnout led me to build Bala — and caught up with me again as we grew. Here's how I manage now.
Burnout recovery inspired Bala, but founder Natalie Holloway found lasting relief through lifestyle changes, self-kindness, and using a life coach.
8 Rare Vintage Tech Products Worth Thousands That Might Be Hiding In Your Attic
Collectible tech is a lot newer than most other kinds of vintage items, which might take hundreds of years to become interesting. Nostalgia plays a big part.
Hacker hijacks Amazon accounts via Kindle ebook
An ethical hacker has warned Kindle users against downloading ebooks from third-party sites after discovering flaws that can expose credit cards
CNET’s Complete Pet Tech Roundup: We Tested Every Device With Our Pets
CNET explored every kind of pet technology to see what we -- and our four-legged friends -- liked the most.
There’s a New Kind of Social Media App People Are Obsessed With. You’ve Probably Used It Already.
Apple’s Find My is Gen Z’s newest social media app. And it’s a dang good one at that.
This Week in Gaming (Week 51)
Welcome to the second to last full week of 2025 and most likely the last week of any kind of interesting new game releases. This week's major release is a first person MMO set in a post Soviet-era universe. If that's not your ginger bread flavour, how about a top-down mix between a MOBA and an RPG, ...
Kindle’s New AI Feature Can Answer Questions About Your Books (Whether Authors Want It or Not)
The Kindle app's new feature will provide AI-generated tips to explain your book's plot or how the characters relate to one another, though it's currently only available on the iOS version.
Stephen Colbert asks why “The Late Show” was canceled if Paramount can offer Warner Bros. $108 billion
"Wow. I gotta say, if my company's got that kind of green, I'm sure they can afford to uncancel one of their best shows," the host said.
'Necessary for the future of humankind': Who was honored at the first-ever Global Space Awards?
The winners of the inaugural Global Space Awards were recently announced at a star-studded ceremony at London's Natural History Museum. The event championed innovation and sustainability, while also celebrating the life of a late NASA astronaut.
Embracing Entrepreneurship: Zoë Tsoukalas - Mays Business School News
From Lemonade Stands to Ledgers “I’ve always had the mindset of entrepreneurship. At a very early age, I began my journey towards entrepreneurship with the typical lemonade and snow cone stands. In high school, I launched a clothing and jewelry business, where everything I sold was handmade and one of a kind. I continued with
Instead of fixing WoW’s new floating house exploit, Blizzard makes it official
“We all kinda immediately agreed this was way too cool to change.”…
Google is building an experimental new browser and a new kind of web app
Meet the GenTab, nothing like the plain ol’ browser tab.
Kindle Scribe Colorsoft brings color e-ink to Amazon’s 11-inch e-reader
Amazon has added color e-ink to its devices more slowly than its competitors.
What will the Washington Nationals do with their bullpen?
After trading Jose A. Ferrer, the Nationals bullpen is even weaker. What kind of additions will Paul Toboni bring in?
Amazon Bets on Color and AI With Its Priciest Kindle to Date
Review: Amazon’s $630 pen-enabled device is a tough sell for most people.
Kindle Scribe Colorsoft review: A very particular set of skills, for a price
Amazon's latest writing tablet will likely appeal to a very specific audience.
The art and science of failing well
There’s bad failure — the kind we ignore or hide — and good failure, which becomes data for future progress. Three experts discuss how to tell the difference.
Robotics industry insider says the future is one soldier backed by AI controlling swarms of drones
Pilots being able to control many drones is "kind of a prerequisite" for "the total drone warfare that is coming to all of us," Ark Robotics told BI.
Utah to enter landmark private equity agreement worth $500 million, per report
The first-of-its-kind agreement could set a new precedent as universities seek competitive edges in the revenue-sharing era
Walmart's outgoing CEO on stepping down: 'I've never had a blank calendar' and it's 'kind of exciting'
Walmart's outgoing CEO Doug McMillon reflects on a career leading over 2 million employees and the thrill of an upcoming break.
NASA’s Webb Identifies Earliest Supernova to Date, Shows Host Galaxy
NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope has observed a supernova that exploded when the universe was only 730 million years old — the earliest detection of its kind
Resurrected Pebble maker announces a kind-of-smart ring for capturing audio notes
The Pebble Index 01 isn’t quite a smart ring, but it can do some smart things.
Pebble's founder introduces a $75 AI smart ring for recording brief notes with a press of a button
After rebooting the Pebble smartwatch, founder Eric Migicovsky is expanding his company's device lineup with a new smart wearable: an AI-powered smart ring known as Index 01. Named for the finger where the ring is meant to be worn, the new $75 ring is not meant to be a competitor to the always-on, always-listening AI devices, like the AI pendant Friend, but instead offers a way to record quick notes and reminders with a press of a button on the ring's side. AI only comes into play via the open source, speech-to-text, and AI models that run locally on your smartphone, via the open source Pebble mobile app. That is, if the Ring's button is not being pressed, it's not recording. (And this is a press-and-hold gesture, too, which means you can't start the ring's recording and then let go to surreptitiously record a conversation.) You can wear the stainless steel ring while in the shower, washing hands, doing dishes, or in the rain, but you would have to take it off for other water-related activities, like swimming. At launch, it's water-resistant to 1 meter. The ring is also not a fitness tracker or sleep monitor. It doesn't record details about your heart rate or health. And it's not there to be your AI friend. "I'm not trying to build some AI assistant thing," Migicovsky told TechCrunch in an interview. "I build things that solve one main problem, and they solve it really well," he explains. "I think of as external memory for my brain...that's what this is. It's always with you." Plus, the ring has been designed to be highly reliable and privacy-preserving, he says, as all your thoughts are stored on your phone, not in the cloud. There is no subscription. Migicovsky has been wearing the ring for three months now and says he cannot imagine going back to a world where he doesn't always have a memory device with him. "The problem is that, during the day, I get ideas or I remember something, and if I don't write it down that second, I forget it," he says. The ring solves this problem, he adds, without becoming another device you need to charge. "The battery lasts for years," Migicovsky claims. Technically, the ring is said to support roughly 12 to 14 hours of recording. On average, the founder says he uses it 10-20 times per day to record 3-6 second thoughts. At that rate, he'll get about two years of usage. When the ring's battery dies, you can ship it back to the company for recycling. When using Index, you can record up to five minutes of audio, which can be saved to the ring and synced to your phone later. This makes sense for recording briefer, personal thoughts and notes, even when you don't have your phone handy, but it wouldn't work for recording a longer chat, like a presentation, meeting, or in-person interview of some kind. The ring also supports 99+ languages and has a bit of on-device memory, in case you're not in Bluetooth range of your device, where the recording is ultimately saved and transcribed. (The raw audio is retained, too, in case the speech-to-text is garbled due to loud background noise). If you own a Pebble smartwatch or one from another brand, your recorded thought can even appear on the watch's screen so you can verify it's correct. The ring works with Pebble's mobile app, which offers notes and reminders, but can optionally integrate with your phone's calendaring system, too, or other apps, like Notion. And the ring's software is open source, which makes it hackable by the community, the founder points out. Because of its open nature, the ring's button is already programmable. In addition to the press-and-hold gesture, you can program the ring to do other things with a single or double press, like play or pause your music or control the shutter on your phone's camera. You could use it to send a message through the universal chat app Beeper, which Migicovsky also created, or you could add your own voice actions via MCP. A new approach to hardware Migicovsky acknowledges that hardware can be difficult to get right -- as the previous exit of Pebble to Fitbit showed. (Fitbit, too, was later acquired by Google in 2021). "I didn't earn any money during Pebble -- we exited, but it was not a great exit," Migicovsky admits. This year, however, he decided to reboot the Pebble project after Google open sourced the PebbleOS, which opened up the door to new hardware. With his new company, Core Devices, Migicovsky plans to do things differently. Still, the founder doesn't regret his previous choices, he clarifies. "I wouldn't have gone back and changed anything. I loved what we built. I loved what we did. I love the company that we built, but it's not the only way to build a company," he told TechCrunch. " And, speaking as an ex-YC partner, there are -- there's a time and a place for building a venture-backed startup. Some companies are phenomenal when they raise money and build a big team, and I tried that...I think what I'm doing now is trying an alternative path, which is start from profitability," he says. The new company is a small team of five, self-funded, and focused on sustainability. So far, Core Devices has shipped the Pebble 2 Duo smartwatch with a black-and-white display. Its first run sold out, and the company is now preparing to ship the upgraded version, the Pebble Time 2. The newer device, which has seen 25,000 pre-orders, is a stainless steel watch with a larger, color e-ink screen. As for the Index 01, the ring's pre-order offer ends in March 2026. After that, the price increases to $99. It currently comes in silver, polished gold, and matte black and works with iOS and Android devices. Customers can select from eight ring sizes and three colors.
MediaKind and Harmonic’s Video Business to Combine, Creating a Leading Streaming-Infrastructure Platform
Denver, COLORADO – 8 December, 2025 – MediaKind, a global leader in cloud-based video streaming technology, today announced it has entered into an agreement to acquire the Video Business of Harmonic Inc. (NASDAQ: HLIT) for approximately $145 million. Following a French employee works council consultation process, the parties would immediately execute a purchase agreement, and… Continue reading MediaKind and Harmonic’s Video Business to Combine, Creating a Leading Streaming-Infrastructure Platform
Harmonic Announces Pending Sale of Its Video Business to MediaKind
/PRNewswire/ -- Harmonic (NASDAQ: HLIT), the worldwide leader in virtualized broadband and video delivery solutions, today announced it has received a binding...
When News Becomes Entertainment; Check That Off The List
People want news, but not from news outlets; X’s blue checkmarks are coming home to roost; and Meta is finally paying publishers (kind of).
USB Video Capture Devices: Wow! They’re All Bad!!
[VWestlife] purchased all kinds of USB video capture devices — many of them from the early 2000s — and put them through their paces in trying to digitize VHS classics like Instant Firep…
Science & Medicine: A discovery by San Antonio scientists could lead to a new kind of treatment for Alzheimer's disease
UT Health San Antonio researchers have teased out why some lipids spike in the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease and what that may mean for cognitive function, revealing a new target for potential treatments.
Undocumented immigrants deserve health care — they’ve already paid for it
Last month, one of the kindergarten students I counsel as a social work intern was absent from class for most of the week. This student missed school Tuesday through Friday. On Friday, her teacher …
Horses is a hit, but its studio might still be in trouble
“This still does not compare to the kind of audience we would have on Steam.”
Dodgers notes: Dave Roberts, Rob Manfred, Miguel Rojas
Dodgers manager was a guest Wednesday night on ‘Good Sports with Kevin Hart and Kenan Thompson’ on Amazon Prime, and was asked if Major League Baseball should have a salary cap. “I’m alright with that,” Roberts said. “I think the NBA’s done a nice job of kind of revenue sharing with the players and the […]
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei drags OpenAI and Google: 'We don't have to do any code reds'
Anthropic's CEO said his company is avoiding the kind of battles OpenAI and Google are fighting by targeting AI for enterprise instead of consumers.
Check out the first droolworthy pictures of the upcoming Motorola Edge 70 Ultra flagship!
Now this looks like a very different kind of Android high-ender than what we're normally used to.
“It kind of feels like we’ve opened Pandora’s box”: Jenna Ortega spoke about AI in the entertainment industry
"It's unacceptable, and many famous people are being victimized."
Commentary: What WA’s elections say about Oregon politics
Oregon political observers hoping to extract lessons of some kind from the votes of Nov. 4 aren’t completely out of luck thanks to their neighbor on the north side of the Columbia River Elections in various states this month drew national attention and pundits read them closely for longer-term implications, but not in Oregon, where […]
'Wonderful and kind' TV star stopped by multiple businesses in Peoria
The well-known actor was in town for the 2025 Illinois Comic Con and patronized local businesses.
Science must move from materialism to mystery
Theoretical physicist and neuroscientist Àlex Gómez-Marín argues that modern science has become trapped in a framework that mistakes matter for the whole of reality. In this wide-ranging interview, Gómez-Marín challenges the foundations of materialism, defends the scientific study of near-death experiences, and calls for a new type of science grounded in mystery and a renewed sense of the sacred. He suggests that abandoning materialism could open the door to a deeper understanding of consciousness, death, and the purpose of human existence. Simon Custer: You are both a theoretical physicist and a neuroscientist, and you have also been fiercely critical of materialist theories of mind and consciousness. What do you think the ultimate nature of reality is?Àlex Gómez-Marín: I don't know what the ultimate nature of reality is, but what I try to first assess is whether the stories that they [mainstream science] have told us about it are right, or maybe whether there are other alternatives. That's why I've been a fierce critic of materialism. As a scientist, I realized that they had sold us this idea that to be a good scientist you also had to subscribe to many other -isms, like materialism, reductionism, and even secularism. And so first I think one needs to unmount these -isms, and then, as is happening today in consciousness studies, we have a huge landscape where there isn't only one game in town, the idea that matter is the only thing that really exists. But because we are studying the hard problem of consciousness, it may be the case that other views of reality, like idealism, or even dualism, or other theories like dual aspect monism... these are philosophical ideas that now, I think, have room in science to be taken seriously. How does something like materialism relate to dualism or idealism? What is materialism in the first place?Well, materialism is the philosophical position that matter is the only really ‘real’ thing in the universe. And I think that worked kind of well because science started 400 years ago and Galileo made that split, I call it the foundational wound. It was a great business move.He said, let's start doing science on that portion of reality that lends itself more easily to mathematization and measurement. So, for some reason, the solidity of this table or the movement of planets lend themselves very well to this foundational idea of science. But as time went on, 400 years later, we realized that we had forgotten the other side, which is what really matters.What really matters is pain, is love, is feelings, sensation, consciousness, which is very hard to define, but very intimate. We all know what it is. It's that thing that disappears when we go into deep sleep and comes back in the morning. SUGGESTED VIEWING On the edges of knowledge With Michael Shermer, Rupert Sheldrake, Güneş Taylor It's what it is like to be, as Nagel said. It's the feeling of being alive. So, materialism is good to study certain things, but then when it ossifies into this ideology and then is dressed like science, now it's preventing us from understanding these key questions that are really that everybody wants to know.Why are we here? Why do we feel reality? Where do we go when we die? And so we need other ways. We need pluralism. I'm only asking for having more options on the table and taking them seriously. Why does materialism fail to explain consciousness? For example, if you were to lobotomize me, I would not be a functional human being. What do you say to someone who might think that materialism adequately explains the mind?Well, here we could speak about different things. We could talk about physics or about neuroscience. I happen to have training with both.For instance, for neuroscientists, 99% of them, I'm not included in that portion, believe that the brain can only be a productive organ. It's an organ that somehow, somewhere, consciousness emerges. It's like a lamp. And then something happens, magic happens, and then consciousness emerges.That's the position you need to be if you're a materialist because if the only really ‘real’ thing is matter, then you need to say, just give us some more time and money and we'll figure out how mind emerges or is produced from matter. There are many philosophically sophisticated ways of criticizing this.Now there's another option, which is the brain as a permissive organ. This was said by William James more than 100 years ago.Now then the brain wouldn't be like this machine, like for instance, a heat engine whose smoke is consciousness, which is what we would have in the first big model, the productive model. But in the permissive model, the brain would be a kind of a filter. And so the brain would still have a very important role in consciousness, but it wouldn't be a productive role.It would be permissive, much like a filter or much like a prism which would receive light. And - I'm speaking metaphorically - it would receive the light of the mind and then it could reflect it and refract it.Now, with these two big options on the table, I think we can make progress into what I call the edges of consciousness, which are all these experiences, weird experiences that many people have, but we don't talk about enough, like near-death experiences, precognitive dreams, synchronicities. These experiences are very important for humans and they have a place in the permissive hypothesis and they are literally impossible in the productive hypothesis. So that's yet one more reason to explore alternatives to materialism. There may be anecdotal evidence for near-death experiences, but is there robust evidence that would be accepted by the majority of scientists who subscribe to the scientific method?Sure. And the plural of anecdotes, someone said, is data.And there's a lot of data. Actually, this year is the 50th anniversary, half a century, since Dr. Raymond Moody realized that we have two ears and one mouth and started listening to what his patients had to say about their experiences while they were clinically dead.The heart had stopped, breathing had stopped in these patients. These patients would come back and tell him these amazing stories that some people may say are hallucinations, but for the patients were hyper-real, like seeing light at the end of the tunnels, seeing deceased family members waiting for them, feeling bliss.___I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain.___And so he and others started taking them seriously and writing their accounts down. And then you can do a science based on that material of experience that people have. Now, on the more objective side, more recently people have started to measure what's going on in the brain when people are clinically dead and brought back. This has opened a proper field of study, which is near-death studies.Evidence is a difficult word, because sometimes people think that when you say evidence, this is just the final proof. Evidence is like in a jury. You bring testimony, you bring pieces of data that point in one direction or another.I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain. When brains are broken or shut off, there can still be mind going on. And that's revolutionary.That would entail that when we die, it's not game over, which, by the way, is the thesis of materialism. If consciousness survives, materialism dies. It's game over for materialism if something of us continues after we die. Do you think that there is mental continuity after death?Well, I think so, and I believe so, and I could also say I may have experienced it myself, because four years ago I had a near-death experience. I was in the hospital, I lost a lot of blood, and I saw those beings at the end of the tunnel, three beings, and there was yellow light. I was in a well, I was looking upwards, and I hadn't read about NDEs by then, but when I came back from this experience, I decided I would try to integrate this also in my professional life. Not just my personal life, of course, but my professional life as a physicist and as a neuroscientist. So I may have had the experience of glimpses of what an afterlife would be, and I'm not ashamed to say it in this way, and then one can do science of it, and then one can do philosophy of it.One can think about what -isms we were discussing, what views on reality would allow those experiences to be really ‘real,’ as opposed to, well, poor guy, the brain was kind of broken, it must have been a hallucination. Do you have a view about whether individuality or “the ego” persists after death, or whether we sort of merge into some sort of cosmic consciousness instead?I don't know, but my view would be along those lines you're suggesting. I think we could speak about a kind of universal mind, and then the problem is not how we emerge from matter, but how we fragment from a more holistic consciousness into these individual eddies and then when we die, this kind of dissipates.But I'm not sure. For instance, idealism would promote that view, but then what would survive of us after these eddies just vanish and become again the big Consciousness, I'm not sure what that would be. I don't know for sure, but I would tell you I believe something of us survives.And there are other lines of research, not just near-death experience, that can address this really hard question of survival. For instance, there are children who remember previous lives. This was studied by Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia for more than 50 years.___Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.___It's amazing research. He went all over the world, especially in the East, and collected all these case studies, all these stories. In plural, these were data of kids, very young age, who would describe up to 40 items that then he could go and verify.There was no internet. There was really no way the kid could know. Why would the kid say that when I was living in this other body and I was a woman and that's how my house would look like or that's how I would die, right? Again, there is evidence, not proof, but there's evidence not only that something weird and interesting is happening as we cross the threshold, but also when we come back to this life.Scientists should not be afraid of studying this, but they are because there's stigma. There's usually stigma upon the enigma, and this is so unfortunate. And one of the reasons is because of the ideology of materialism, because those things cannot be possible. What is wrong with the politics of science such that they have generated this stigma?So many things. Science is a human activity to begin with.So it falls prey to all our passions and ego and greed. That's one thing. Science is a job for the good and for the bad.You need to get a salary. You need to get grants. Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.And then, we didn't have time to unpack this, but science for many years become entangled, as I was suggesting before, to other -isms, materialism, secularism. So anything that smells like the afterlife, people may think has to do with God, and then they freak out.Anything that suggests that there's something about the mind that may not need a physical material substrate to exist, it smells like non-materialism. So, all these -isms are ideologically blocking that kind of research, and then there are all these sociopolitical constraints as to what should be studied and what shouldn't be studied.I call it the backstage of science. Sometimes we scientists or science communicators seem to speak as if the data is the only thing that matters. We say, well, data and theory.But then there's a third leg of this stool, which is all the politics that goes behind the scenes. And we often don't speak about this, and it's quite vicious and petty, and it's very real. Why is materialism so attractive to most scientists?Well, an easy answer is because we've grown up with it.It's what the educational system promotes, and that's what you hear when you go to university. So it's like growing in a culture. It feels like the air in which you breathe.So it's very hard to begin with to detect, well, maybe there's another alternative. Maybe there are other ways of doing science, other environments in which one could do science. That's one reason.And other reasons maybe are more profound, and I'm not qualified to explain them, but I could say, looking at this 400-year history of science, since it started around 1623 with Galileo's book The Assayer, that science went and coupled with all what's going on in the West.And so the fall of religion, you could say, and science presented us this new alternative that then could be coupled very well with other -isms, and this idea of growth, and then science losing its good twin brother, which was philosophy. There's a whole natural history of science starting as philosophy, kind of emancipating or breaking out from philosophy, and then marrying technology, and then marrying other social systems.From that point of view, materialism is a very convenient idea to propose. There were attempts, like the German idealists tried to do a more romantic science. But no, the idea prevailed, like Francis Bacon said: You should pursue nature through all her corners, he said, and make her spill her secrets.Our attitude towards nature in the science that dominates is very much reflecting how we treat nature in our society, in our culture, like a resource to extract secrets by force and then dominate it. How is materialism related to the notions of growth and progress? What's wrong with having a productive citizenry?This is another very interesting and very difficult question to answer.But there's this recent book coming out by Paul Kingsnorth. In it, he explains this idea of the machine and this idea of progress. And this, again, this conflation of more is better, of we need to go forward always, and convincing us that the way to do that is to continually extract more from nature. But because we don't have the religious context anymore, because God is dead, then what do we have? We have what we can do as humans with our own gadgets.It's kind of the story of the Promethean fire. We will just build anything to make ourselves God.A good example today is transhumanism. Transhumanism is this pseudo-religion dressed in technoscientific language whose goal is very religious. They promise immortality, they promise redemption, they promise transformation of the entire natural world, but it's done by human means through technology. Are you suggesting that we can't have ethics without religion?Well, we should have ethics with or without religion. That's another pruning that has happened in science. We say, forget about aesthetics, although some physicists still think that beautiful means probably true, and forget about politics. We pretend there's no backstage of science, and even let's forget about ethics.___Science needs to be in the service of mankind.___Scientists, when they become more like engineers, they're just thinking how to make things work so that they can go to the moon, go to Mars, make machines that think, but they don't think whether that's a good idea.And also consider metaphysics. Many scientists for a long time pretended, and maybe that comes from the stream of positivisms, that really one doesn't need metaphysics at all, except that materialism is always the metaphysics running the system.You see, it's not just ethics. It's the pruning of all of these, you could say, five main legs of philosophy that just makes a kind of unconscious science, a science that doesn't really know what it's doing. It's doing it very well locally, but it just doesn't know what it's doing globally. Do you think science has to have an ultimate vision and purpose behind it for it to be effective or for it to be meaningful and transformative?Yes, a way I would say that is that science needs to be in the service of mankind. And it hasn't been that. And we can see it through, you know, when we discovered the secrets of the atom, and all of a sudden, the Manhattan Project, and then we create nuclear weapons.And now we're trying to crack how machines may think, and now we're creating this mess, right? So science needs to be in service of mankind, not in service of a few ideas that maybe want to make more money or just dominate upon nature. What about planes, trains, automobiles, and modern medicine? Hasn't science served mankind by helping us develop those technologies?Yes and no. I see where you're going, and it's fair.I came here by plane, and it's a blessing. When I almost died, the surgeons did their job, and they saved my life. But these two forced choices between Luddites and Silicon Valley types, I think, of course, it's a false dichotomy.Progress, in a way, it's good, but we often don't speak about the dark side of the moon. We say the great things that progress has brought, and we don't speak about the disasters, the side effects that it has come with, and the same when we promise new technologies. We tend to think that any technology is great, that email is going to save us so much time because we don't need to write letters and send them anymore.Is that true? I spend so many hours a week writing emails. Let's just say there are great things about it and bad things about it. People like Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, for example, argue that we've made moral progress over time because of the Enlightenment. Do you think that's totally wrong-headed?I think he's emphasizing a side of the moon, and he does that very well, and you can find tons of plots where there's a slope going up and say it's great. But I think he should also tell the not-so-friendly story.But if your ideology is just to resist and continue to explain that the Enlightenment is the best thing ever and reason is the best thing ever… this feels to me like you're worshipping these abstractions.I'm very critical of it and also of these, again, science communicators and scientists that say, Oh, science says, in the name of science, experts say. It's like, come on, let's be careful because we can shoot ourselves in the foot by putting forth to the people an image of science that we know is not really true. Recently there's been a resurgence of spirituality and of people who say that they're spiritual but not religious, especially in the United States. If materialism is going away, what is going to fill that gap? Are we going to return to traditional religion? Do you see that being connected with the rise of the political right?I'm not a fortune teller, so I don't know what's going to happen. But, yeah, we could say we're in this post-materialist age and even post-secular age. One cannot come back to the past, but maybe just to contact with the roots is a good idea.What do I mean by that? I think we need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method. We need to do so in a culture where we realize humans cannot thrive in a vacuum where there's this idea that the sacred has to be removed.Now, how do we do that without bringing in back all the vices of religion? I don't know. I'm from a Catholic country.Here we are in England, so there are differences and interreligious dialogue has always been a challenge. But I think maybe a way of putting it is: after all these conflicts and branchings I was quickly alluding to, science from philosophy and then also from religion, now there's a time of reconciliation perhaps and maybe debates in the proper sense, like exchange of ideas in service of learning and getting into something higher than both poles. We need science to talk to religious people and it's interesting when people say they're spiritual and not religious.I think this is just a way of saying, no, I don't want to go back, I want to go forward. But at the end of the day, religions have offered us practices and grounding that we now desperately need. Everybody can and should just meditate or pray or do whatever they want, but we're in a crisis and it's time for reconciliation. What do you say to critics that say you are merely projecting our need for meaning onto a fundamentally indifferent universe?Yeah, I know that the typical science communicator says something like this. But we're not projecting. Human beings feed on meaning.It's the other way around. If you're a materialist, because the only thing that there is is matter, all that comes next, free will, consciousness, meaning, this is a kind of illusion that we need to explain.They're just craving for meaning, but there isn't really for them. I would also like to remind my materialist friends that for decades, if not centuries, they've said in the name of science, we know that this and this and this doesn't really exist. I think now they sense they're forced to say, well, actually, we don't know. We've been saying, for instance, that there's nothing after you die, and now probably they need to admit that they don't know the answer.___We need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method.___So it's a moment to open up possibilities and also to gently but fiercely critique these claims that I think harm society. If you say in the name of science, get on with it, when your father dies, you'll never see him again. Well, what the F do you know about it? You haven't studied the literature, you haven't had any of those experiences, and basically what you're doing is you're just doing marketing on ideology. This needs to stop. Do you think that it's scarier for some people to entertain the thought that there might be life after death, compared to a materialist worldview where you just die, given that there might be consequences for unsavory behaviour?Well, death and dying is scary. It's maybe the ultimate ending. It's a limit on life, and when we're in this conquest mode, we don't like limits.And it also has, there's a shockwave backwards, so I think if you change your notion of what death is or may be, you live differently. It also has consequences, as you're saying, for the future because this is not our only goal here and we come back in whatever form. And again, different religions would say different things. I the East, they are more happy with the idea of reincarnation, and here in the West, there are other preferences. But in any case, it changes how we live, and that's really what matters.It's not about just projecting or imagining what we'll be after, but how we live now and also how we treat those who are dying. So it goes from the individual to the families, to the hospitals.Now in the near-death research I do, this has ramifications at all these levels, all the way to society.But our society is thanatophobic. It has a phobia of death. We don't want to hear about death, and this is another thing we need to put on the table and be willing to talk about it. Do you think that we might get closer to answering ultimate questions like why is there anything at all if we jettison materialism?That’s an excellent question, Simon. Two things: we should stop treating reality, I believe, as a great sudoku, as an enigma, as something that with intelligence, money, and time that we will crack and instead treat reality more like a mystery. And what you do for in front of a mystery is not to be the clever guy in a class and say “I’ll solve you” but more like “I will bow and you will transform me.”I know this sounds a bit like a scientist speaking like a mystic. But I think this reorientation is needed. In the end, we won’t crack the big questions, but they will transform us. If we free ourselves from this prison of materialism, the way we will explore these questions will be freer, more creative, and in service of mankind. Do you think exploring mystery is the reason why we are here?I think we are here because, and this pseudo-theological argument I’m making off the cuff, But the One, the Absolute, if there is such a thing, had everything except limitation. We are that absolute experiencing that contingency. It’s like an act of divine proprioception. It’s a wonderful adventure, it’s just incredible to be alive. Perhaps we have forgotten why we are here and the whole point is to experience the flesh.Let me end by saying this. I criticize materialism harshly. I bang on this dead horse, because I think it’s dead. But matter is a great mystery. So maybe my invitation is as follows: hey materialist friends, come here, let’s work on materialism 2.0! Consciousness is a mystery, but matter is also a mystery. The fact that we can have an intersubjective experience consensus, the fact that we can apply mathematics, that we can measure things... the physical world we take for granted, but it is a great mystery too.Maybe that’s related to your last question: why are we here? Why did spirit decide to incarnate? Being in the flesh may be a great thing if spirit decided to do so.Àlex Gómez-Marín, thank you very much.My pleasure.
It’s Suddenly the Greatest Boogeyman for Women in Their 30s and Early 40s. It Doesn’t Need to Be.
It's kind of the Labubu of women's health.