Jamie Chirps 🇨🇦

Freebird. Creative Agent. Minor philosopher. Sharing food for thought in a media-compromised world. #wewin

[Mario Nawfal @MarioNawfal]

🚨🇺🇸BREAKING: The CIA officer caught with $40 million in gold bars allegedly invented an entire fake top-secret spy program to steal the money.

As if this story couldn't get and wilder:

-David Rush allegedly built a sham "special access program," the blackest box in U.S. intelligence, so secret even top-clearance officials couldn't look inside without authorization

-The fake program posed as "continuity of government" work, the doomsday planning that keeps Washington running after a nuclear war

-He allegedly read in two colleagues as unwitting accomplices and used a made-up government contract to funnel millions, persuading a defense contractor to buy huge amounts of gold

-The FBI raid on his home seized 303 gold bars worth roughly $40 million, $2 million in cash, and 35 luxury watches

-Investigators say he lied about his college degrees, faked being a Navy pilot, and still sailed through the CIA's notoriously brutal vetting

-A judge ordered him held as a flight risk, and several CIA officials are now on leave as the probe widens

The scheme worked because of the system, not in spite of it.

The secrecy walls built to hide operations from China and Russia hid the fraud from the CIA itself.

A man with a fake résumé ran a fake doomsday program inside the most paranoid institution in America, and for years nobody noticed...

Source: Washington Post

[Tablesalt 🇨🇦🇺🇸 @Tablesalt13]

Canada is cooked.

This is about us.

and its being brought forward by a democrat.

[Steven Bonk @StevenBonkMP]

The Liberals shut down farming research stations across Canada.

Then they gave $160,000 to fund two grotesque “art” shows, including a theatrical performance featuring actors playing sexualized 13-year-old twin boys doing “sexy dances,” stripping naked, and performing a “blood sacrifice.”

[Massimo @Rainmaker1973]

In the 1990s, Canadian ecologist Suzanne Simard made a groundbreaking discovery that challenged everything we thought we knew about how forests work. While studying managed forests in British Columbia, she noticed something puzzling: when birch trees were removed to promote the growth of valuable Douglas firs, the firs did not flourish as expected, they actually struggled and grew more slowly.

Determined to understand why, Simard traced the movement of nutrients using radioactive carbon isotopes. What she found was astonishing. Trees were actively sharing resources through vast underground fungal networks known as mycorrhizae. These delicate, thread-like fungi connect the roots of different trees across the forest floor, forming a complex web that allows the exchange of carbon, water, nutrients, and even chemical signals, sometimes between entirely different species.

She discovered that older, larger trees often serve as central "hubs" or "mother trees," supporting younger saplings by redistributing vital resources and helping the entire ecosystem remain resilient. When these key trees are removed, the underground network weakens, and the health of the remaining forest declines.

Simard’s research overturned the traditional Darwinian view of forests as battlegrounds of ruthless competition. Instead, she revealed a far more sophisticated reality: forests operate as highly cooperative systems where trees communicate, support one another, and even warn neighboring trees about threats like drought, disease, or insect attacks.

What appears to the human eye as a silent, still forest is, in truth, a vibrant, interconnected living network, built not on isolation and rivalry, but on deep connection and mutual aid.

[Melissa 🇨🇦 @MelissaLMRogers]

WOW 🤯 of course the verdict was POSTPONED today of the alleged Chinese SPY, a former employee with Hydro Québec who is charged with carrying out economic espionage for CHINA

He was charged in 2022, verdict postponed today 👀

Nothing to see here folks 🇨🇦

[Sundance Construction @SundanceConstr1]

This isn't about opening up an opportunity for Indigenous business. The Liberals will use the Indigenous content stream to bypass real bids and flood the programs with their "consultants" and insiders who have set up fake Indigenous JVs and biz.

I really wish people understood this. It's well documented by many MPs in committee and the auditor general.

"Consultation" is a code word for insider deals. That's it. I AM an Indigenous biz. And we have never made it through any of these funding programs.

Much of this is set up for pre arranged insiders.

[Ryan Gerritsen🇨🇦🇳🇱 @ryangerritsen]

Let me take you back to 1993 in Toronto Canada.
McDonald’s had 23 outlets in Skydome and guess who they employed? 1600 Teenagers aged 16 to 18 years old.
These jobs were not meant to be careers, they were a way for teens to earn some money for the summer and post secondary school.

[🇨🇦 Antonio Tweets @AntonioTweets2]

Brilliant. 👇🇨🇦

[Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005]

Two math olympiad champions wrote a training manual in 1993 on two old Macintosh computers, and every American kid who has won a major math competition in the last decade learned to think from it.

Their names are Sandor Lehoczky and Richard Rusczyk. The book is called The Art of Problem Solving. Most people in math know it as AoPS.

Since 2015, every single member of the US International Math Olympiad team has been an AoPS student. Not most of them. Every one.

That statistic sounds impossible until you understand what the book actually does.

Lehoczky and Rusczyk were not professors. They were competitors. Lehoczky earned the sole perfect AIME score in 1990 and led the national first place team. Rusczyk was a USA Mathematical Olympiad winner and a perfect AIME scorer in 1989. They had both survived the same brutal selection process the book was designed to train students for.

And the first thing they decided was that almost every existing math textbook was teaching the wrong thing.

School math gives you formulas. You memorize them. You apply them. You pass the test. Then you sit down in front of a real competition problem and the formula does not apply, and you have nothing underneath it.

That is the gap. The gap is not knowledge. It is thinking.

The entire premise of AoPS is that problem-solving is a transferable skill, not a bag of memorized tricks. A student who genuinely understands why a technique works can adapt it, combine it with something else, and deploy it in a context they have never seen before. A student who only memorized the technique freezes the moment the problem looks different.

The book teaches the difference between a formula and a method.

A formula tells you what to compute. A method tells you how to see. The students who win olympiads are not the ones who know more formulas. They are the ones who have trained themselves to look at an unfamiliar problem and recognize its structure. To see that this problem is secretly asking the same question as a problem they solved three weeks ago, just dressed differently.

Rusczyk calls this "learning to read the problem." Not reading the words. Reading what the problem is actually asking underneath the words.

The second thing they built into the book is tolerance for being stuck.

Most students treat confusion as a signal to stop. The book treats confusion as the starting point. Every chapter pushes students past the point where the obvious approach runs out. That moment of running out is not failure. That is where the actual thinking begins.

Lehoczky once described it this way. If you can solve a problem quickly, you are not learning. You are performing. Learning only happens when you are past the edge of what you already know.

The book was written on old Macintosh computers in 1993. Rusczyk launched the AoPS website in 2003. Today the community has over one million users. Thousands of students enroll in AoPS online courses every year. Most winners of every major American math competition are AoPS alumni.

A platform built by two kids who were good at math competitions has become the infrastructure that produces the next generation of mathematicians, engineers, and scientists who are good at thinking.

The formulas you memorized in school will eventually be obsolete.

The thinking you trained will not.

What is one problem in your life right now that you have been avoiding because you do not yet know the right formula to solve it?

[Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005]

A Russian psychologist spent 10 years proving that the act of talking to yourself out loud is one of the most powerful cognitive tools the human brain has, and almost nobody outside his field has read the work.

His name was Lev Vygotsky.

He worked in Moscow in the 1920s and died of tuberculosis in 1934 at the age of 37. He had no laboratory, no funding, almost no English readers, and a body of work that the Soviet government suppressed for two decades after he died.

He produced the foundational theory of how human cognition actually develops, and the central piece of that theory was a behavior almost every adult is faintly embarrassed about.

Vygotsky noticed that young children talk to themselves constantly. They narrate their own actions, they argue with imaginary opponents, they instruct themselves through tasks out loud.

The dominant theory at the time, from the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget, said this was a sign of cognitive immaturity that children would eventually grow out of as they learned to think properly.

Vygotsky said the exact opposite.

He argued that this self-directed speech was the most important cognitive event in the entire developmental window, because it was the moment a child first started to use language as a tool to control their own mind. The child was not failing to think. The child was learning how to think by externalizing the process and listening to themselves do it.

He predicted that as children matured, this out-loud self-talk would not disappear. It would go underground. It would become silent inner speech, which is the running monologue every adult has inside their own head for the rest of their life.

The voice you hear when you read this sentence is the direct descendant of a four-year-old narrating their own block tower.

For 50 years almost nobody outside Russia had access to his work, and the few researchers who did pick it up could not get funding to test it. Then in the early 2000s the experiments finally started to pile up, and what they found was that Vygotsky had been right about something even more important than he knew.

The first major study came from Gary Lupyan at the University of Wisconsin and Daniel Swingley at the University of Pennsylvania in 2012. They ran a simple visual search experiment. Participants were shown 20 images at once and asked to find a specific object, like a banana or a chair. In one condition they searched silently. In the other condition they were told to say the name of the object out loud to themselves while looking for it.

The participants who spoke the target name out loud found the object significantly faster, with higher accuracy, than the participants who searched in silence. The effect was strongest when the spoken word matched a familiar object the brain already had a strong category for.

Saying the word out loud literally tuned the visual system to detect that thing better. The researchers called it the label feedback effect, and the implication was that the act of vocalizing a goal physically changes how the brain processes the world while pursuing it.

The second major study came out of the University of Michigan and Michigan State in 2017. The lead researchers were Ethan Kross and Jason Moser, and they used both EEG and fMRI to record what happens inside the brain when people talk to themselves while emotionally upset.

They asked participants to recall painful autobiographical memories and reflect on them in two different ways. Some used the first person, saying things like "why am I feeling this way." Others used the third person, referring to themselves by their own name, saying things like "why is John feeling this way."

The brain scans showed that the simple act of switching from first person to third person, even silently, decreased activity in the medial prefrontal cortex, the region responsible for rumination and self-referential pain. Within a single second of using their own name instead of the word I, participants showed measurably lower emotional reactivity. The shift required no extra cognitive effort. It cost the brain nothing. And it worked.

Kross described the mechanism in his interviews. Talking to yourself by name creates a small amount of psychological distance from your own experience. Your brain processes the situation more like a problem belonging to someone else, which means it can analyze it instead of drowning in it.

What Vygotsky had intuited in 1934 turned out to be even more powerful than the developmental theory he built it into. The voice you use to talk to yourself is not background noise. It is one of the most precise cognitive tools the brain has, and you can change how it works just by changing the pronoun you use.

People who talk through problems out loud are not anxious or unstable. They are running an externalized version of a process the rest of us are running silently and worse. The kindergartener narrating their block tower, the surgeon muttering through a procedure, the engineer pacing a hallway describing a bug to nobody, the athlete repeating a cue to themselves before a free throw, they are all using the same ancient mechanism that builds and steers human thought.

You can run the experiment yourself the next time you are stuck on something hard. Stop trying to solve it silently in your head. Say it out loud. Describe what you are seeing. Walk yourself through the steps as if you were explaining it to a colleague who is not in the room.

And when something genuinely upsets you, switch to your own name. Ask why this person is feeling this way, instead of why I am feeling this way.

The voice you have been told to keep quiet your entire life is one of the oldest pieces of cognitive technology you own.

Most people are still embarrassed to use it.

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

The car that used to be in my garage is currently in an Earth-Mars elliptical orbit and will be there for at least 10 million years

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

SpaceX was less than 10 people back then. We didn’t even have office furniture.

[Bull Theory @BullTheoryio]

THIS IS VERY CONCERNING.

Anthropic just called for a global pause in AI development, warning that AI is getting close to improving itself without human help.

In April 2026, Claude ran a full AI research project completely on its own. Humans picked the topic. Claude came up with every experiment, ran every test, and delivered the results.

Two human researchers spent a full week on the same problem and got 23% of the way there.

Claude got 97%.

Claude Mythos Preview is now 52x faster than a skilled human at improving AI training code. The same task takes a human 4 to 8 hours. Claude does it better.

Claude already writes 80% of Anthropic's own code. Their engineers are getting 8x more work done than in 2024, not because they work harder, but because Claude does most of it.

In March 2024, Claude could handle a 4 minute task on its own. Today it handles 12 hour tasks. That number doubles every 4 months. Week long tasks are expected by 2027.

Anthropic warns once AI can build and improve its own next version without any human help, nobody knows how fast things move after that or if humans will still be able to control it.

[Sneha @Sneha_TechAI]

@XFreeze Community Notes is easily the best feature added to this platform. Standard fact-checking is dead; decentralized consensus is the future. 🤝"

[X Freeze @XFreeze]

Elon Musk on why Community Notes is so powerful:

“Community Notes is the best. It’s awesome because everybody gets checked, including me

All the software is open source, and all the data is open source. So you can recreate any note independently. Total, absolute transparency in everyway

Sometimes people ask me to remove a note. I’m like...... I don’t even remove notes on my own account. Nothing. If I did that, it would stick out like a sore thumb immediately”

The best counter to misinformation isn’t censorship

It’s better information - checked in real-time by millions of people who can actually look at the source material themselves

That’s how you get closer to the truth

[The HighWire @HighWireTalk]

An Italian researcher has been analyzing excess mortality data from central and southern Italy, and what he found in the numbers directly undermines one of the central claims of the pandemic narrative.

Excess deaths in those regions were higher in 2022 than in 2021, and higher than in 2020, during a period when COVID deaths were declining. When asked whether the data support the claim that COVID vaccines saved millions of lives, his answer was unambiguous: That cannot be true. The numbers say otherwise.

But the more significant finding involves how deaths were classified. In Italy, anyone who died within 14 days of receiving a vaccine was counted as unvaccinated. Every death in that window was placed into the wrong category. That single accounting decision, the researcher argues, is what created the statistical foundation for the narrative of a "pandemic of the unvaccinated."

As Italy rolled out vaccines to specific age groups in sequence, deaths in those same age groups would spike among people classified as unvaccinated, in direct coincidence with the vaccine rollout for that cohort. The same pattern repeated across each age group as the rollout reached them. Those deaths were not occurring in unvaccinated people. They were occurring in the newly vaccinated, and the 14-day classification rule was moving them into the wrong column.

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

🤔

Can’t think of a single time this happened

[The Food Professor @FoodProfessor]

Liberals' grocery benefit payments start for eligible Canadians today.

But guess what? It won't lower food prices.