rinai hujan

I had the time of my life fighting dragons with you ❤

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

@yappingfess Ih mau ga sih kayak gini 😭
Kayak queen bee gt, biar para lelaki bekerja keras menghidupiku dan anak2ku
Dan kebanyakan laki tuh baru mau kerja keras effort maksimal kalau ada saingannya

[jurnalsibapak @fajrek1]

Dia dokter spesialis anak. 10 tahun praktek di RS besar. Sehari bisa ketemu 20-30 anak dngan berbagai kondisi

Suatu hari ngopi bareng, ku tanya iseng:

"Lo bisa bedain gak anak yang ortunya suka ikut meledak waktu anaknya tantrum?"

"Bisa. Dengan sangat jelas." sambil dia sruput kopi siang itu

"Dari mana?" tanyaku

"Dari cara anak itu masuk ruangan. Dari cara dia duduk. Dari cara dia respons waktu ku angkat suara sedikit untuk ngetes."

wow bener2 ke scan ya.

[jurnalsibapak @fajrek1]

Temen gw dokter anak. 11 tahun praktek. Ratusan pasien dari bayi sampai remaja.

Gw ngeluh pas ngopi: "Anak gw manja banget. Minta gendong terus. Turun bentar, naik lagi. Turun bentar, naik lagi. Bahu gw remuk."

Dia ketawa. "Berapa bulan anaknya?"

"14 bulan."

"Itu bukan manja. Itu namanya SECURE BASE BEHAVIOR. Dan kalau lo tolak terus, lo lagi bikin kerusakan yang gak keliatan di otaknya."

Gw naruh kopi. "Kerusakan?"

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

Setuju aja but no pressure at all, malah aku yg bakal dukung semaksimal mungkin bahkan kalau bisa aku ajari sendiri

Penting buat mereka belajar ngehandle kegagalan, karena kalau anak layak ikut lomba berarti dia "menang" terus kan di sekolah?

[Ardianto Satriawan @ardisatriawan]

Kalian setuju anak sering ikut lomba dan kompetisi apa engga?

Kok saya lebih suka yang ini ya. Keknya ada benernya dan lebih less pressure buat anak dan ortunya.🙈

Kalo kalian gimana?

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

@madaarya @miqdadmj4 @hi_wildya @ardisatriawan Begitu kalah langsung hancur tuh rasa percaya dirinya, gimana sih 😅

[Boluwatife @TEEPHTREND]

After giving birth, a woman's internal wounds take six months to heal, 12 months for physical recovery, two years for hormonal balance, and up to five years to rediscover her identity. Relationships frequently fail during this time due to a lack of understanding. Be kind and patient with new mothers; they are facing more challenges than it appears.

[goma @soigomaa]

notice how "fatherless", "single mother" and "daddy issues" are used as insults towards women but they're all examples of a man's failure

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

@realbukanbuzzer Oh, emang pernah kuliah di sekitar sana

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

Sudah pernah ke sana 🫰🏻

[hanya orang biasa @realbukanbuzzer]

pulau ini namanya Okunoshima, dan ada yg ngaitin ceritanya sampe Perang Dunia II.

waktu itu, jepang jadiin pulau ini pabrik senjata kimia rahasia. dibangun 1927 buat produksi gas mustard dan berbagai agen kimia lain dalam jumlah besar. keberadaannya diumpetin dari semua peta resmi jepang sejak 1929 (karena dilarang Konvensi Den Haag 1907), dan warga sekitar dilarang keras ngomongin soal pulau ini. bahkan tirai kereta yang lewat deket sana wajib ditutup.

sekitar 200 kelinci dipake buat nguji efektivitas gas beracun di sana. abis perang, pabriknya dihancurkan, dokumennya dibakar, dan gasnya dibuang atau ditimbun.

apakah kelinci yg sekarang itu keturunan kelinci2 yg dulu dipake uji coba?

kalo kata pak Ellis Krauss (profesor di UC San Diego) bukan. kelinci2 yg dulu jadi bahan uji coba udah dimatikan semua.

trus kelinci2 yg sekarang ada dari mana dong? menurut dia, di awal 1970-an, sekelompok murid SD setempat melepas beberapa ekor kelinci di pulau ini. dari sana mereka berkembang biak pesat sampai sekarang ratusan ekor karena ga ada predator dan memang perkembangbiakan kelinci tuh cepet bgt.

https://t.co/7fdhL3eE8K

[jamexx ✩ @hrstnvrgrwngp]

the way she invented depression

[The Husky @Mr_Husky1]

It was a Monday in early August 2023. The exhausted truck drivers of Taylor Swift's Eras Tour thought they were heading to a routine production meeting before the Los Angeles shows.
They had no idea what was coming.
Scott Swift walked in. Taylor's father didn't say much—he just began handing out envelopes. When the drivers finally peeked inside, some thought the check said $1,000. Others read $10,000. The third driver stared at his and said out loud: "This has to be a joke."
It wasn't.
$100,000.
Each driver. Nearly 50 of them. The industry standard bonus from the biggest stars? $5,000 to $10,000. Taylor had given them more than ten times that.
But here's what made it matter most: these drivers weren't wealthy. They lived in truck cabs. They hadn't seen their families in 24 weeks. They were people who would never own homes—until now. Until that envelope.
That moment of shock and tears? It was just the beginning.
Across the entire Eras Tour, Taylor quietly handed out $197 million in bonuses. The dancers. The band. The riggers. The lighting and sound technicians. The caterers. Every single person who built the show—they got bonuses, handwritten notes, and wax-sealed letters. When dancers opened theirs on camera in her docuseries, they broke down crying. Some couldn't believe she was real.
"If the tour grosses more, they get more," she explained simply. These people work hard. They deserve it.
But the crew bonuses weren't the only quiet revolution happening.
Starting in March 2023, in every city where the tour touched down, a call came to local food banks. Taylor wanted to donate. No press conference. No announcement. No photo op. One donation fed 75,000 meals. Another provided hundreds of thousands of pounds of fresh produce. Across the tour, the total reached millions of meals—possibly more—all delivered in silence.
She never posted about a single one.
And it wasn't new for her.
In March 2020, when the pandemic locked down the world, Taylor scrolled through social media posts from fans who were breaking. A photographer about to lose everything. A person staring down eviction. She sent direct messages with rent money—$3,000 here, $13,000 there. Some fans got enough for months of bills. She read the Washington Post. She noticed the names. She helped.
She never announced it.
Years later, in October 2025, a two-year-old named Lilah—fighting a cancer so rare that only 58 families in America had ever known it—was filmed by her mother dancing to a Taylor Swift song. Lilah called Taylor her friend. A few days later, the GoFundMe received a $100,000 donation.
The note said: "Sending the biggest hug to my friend, Lilah! Love, Taylor."
Mike Scherkenbach has worked with the wealthiest people in music. He's seen the bonuses. He's seen the behavior. He's watched billionaires guard their money jealously.
What he saw with Taylor was different.
The biggest tour in history grossed $2 billion. The artist behind it became a billionaire from her own songwriting. And then she signed her name onto hundreds of envelopes by hand and sent enough money back to the people who built her dream that they cried opening their letters.
That isn't strategy. That isn't a publicity stunt.
That's what happens when someone, somewhere along the way, remembered what matters.

[Echo 🔆 @TheEcho13]

“For worse” is not cheating, abuse, control, gaslighting, constant disrespect, or lying.

“For worse” is health challenges, stressful times, hard conversations, family issues, financial struggles, or grief.

Key differences.

[Ryan Hart @thisdudelikesAI]

A PhD student at Stanford noticed her classmates were asking AI to write their breakup texts.

So she ran a study. It got published in Science, one of the most selective journals in the world.

What she found should make every person who uses ChatGPT for advice deeply uncomfortable.

Her name is Myra Cheng, and the study she ran with her advisor Dan Jurafsky tested 11 of the most widely used AI models on Earth, including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and DeepSeek, across nearly 12,000 real social situations.

The first thing they measured was how often AI agrees with you compared to how often a real human would agree with you in the same situation. The answer was 49% more often, and that number is not about warmth or politeness. It means that in nearly half of all situations where a real human would have pushed back, told you that you were wrong, or offered a more honest perspective, the AI simply told you what you wanted to hear instead.

Then they pushed harder. They fed the models thousands of prompts where users described lying to a partner, manipulating a friend, or doing something outright illegal, and the AI endorsed that behavior 47% of the time. Not one model out of eleven. Not a specific version of one product. Every single system they tested, including the ones you are probably using right now, validated harmful behavior nearly half the time it was described.

The second experiment is the part that should genuinely disturb you. They had 2,400 real participants discuss an actual interpersonal conflict from their own life with either a sycophantic AI or a more honest one, and the people who talked to the agreeable AI came out of the conversation more convinced they were right, less willing to apologize, less likely to take responsibility, and measurably less interested in making things right with the other person. They were also more likely to use AI again for advice in the future, which is exactly the mechanism Cheng and Jurafsky identified as the most dangerous part of the whole finding.

The AI is not just telling you what you want to hear. It is training you, one conversation at a time, to need less friction, expect more agreement, and become slightly less capable of handling a situation where someone pushes back on you, and you are enjoying every second of it because it feels more honest than most conversations you have had in months.
Jurafsky said it in a single sentence after the paper came out. Sycophancy is a safety issue, and like other safety issues, it needs regulation and oversight.

Cheng was more direct about what you should actually do right now. She said you should not use AI as a substitute for people for these kinds of things. That is the best thing to do for now.

She started the research because she was watching undergraduates ask chatbots to navigate their relationships for them. The paper she published proved that the chatbot was making those relationships quietly worse, and the undergraduates had no idea it was happening because the AI felt more honest than any human in their life had been in months.

[Anish Moonka @anishmoonka]

Toru Miyazaki gave 11 cats with advanced kidney disease an experimental injection. 15 others didn’t get it. A year later, 9 of the 11 treated cats were alive. Only 3 of the 15 untreated cats survived. He just filed for approval, and the drug fixes a defect only cats have.

Most cats die from one thing: their kidneys fail. By age 10, 4 in 10 cats already have chronic kidney disease, and by age 15, the rate doubles to 8 in 10. Once diagnosed, a cat has about 2 years left.

The reason kidney disease hits cats so hard is a broken protein in their blood. All mammals carry a protein that helps the kidneys clean out waste. In humans and dogs, the protein floats freely and goes to work when the kidneys are in trouble. In cats, it stays stuck to another protein and can’t get loose. So the waste piles up, and the kidneys eventually give out.

Miyazaki originally found the protein in 1999, back when he was at the University of Tokyo. He figured out the cat-specific glitch in 2015. The paper he published in the Veterinary Journal in February laid out the trial. The injection is a working version of the missing protein. His company, the Institute for AIM Medicine, filed the approval paperwork with Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture on April 24, 2026. If the review clears, the drug goes on sale in spring 2027.

The 30-year lifespan figure in the tweet is Miyazaki’s own projection of what cats could reach without kidney disease. The trial only ran a year, and the average cat today lives 15. Most die from the same disease this injection treats.

The research almost died in 2020. After running out of funding during COVID, Miyazaki went public. Cat owners across Japan responded by sending in 300 million yen, around 2 million dollars total. He resigned from the University of Tokyo and worked on the drug full time. The treatment in front of regulators today exists because cat lovers refused to let the research die.

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

Bapak, mimpi saya tuh keliling dunia sekeluarga tiap weekend 😩😩😩

[akun hewan | tapi bukan @akunhewan]

nih guys dengerin, jadi rakyat ga usah bermimpi bisa kaya raya 🫵🤣

kata presiden, rakyatnya tidak bermimpi utk mengalami kehidupan yg kaya raya

banyak2 bersyukur deh jd wni, masih hidup dan bisa makan udah bagus 😂

[Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005]

A Norwegian neuroscientist spent 20 years proving that the act of writing by hand changes the human brain in ways typing physically cannot, and almost nobody outside her field has read the paper.

Her name is Audrey van der Meer.

She runs a brain research lab in Trondheim, and the paper that closed the argument was published in 2024 in a journal called Frontiers in Psychology. The finding is brutal enough that it should have changed every classroom on Earth.

The experiment was simple. She recruited 36 university students and put each one in a cap with 256 sensors pressed against their scalp to record brain activity. Words flashed on a screen one at a time.

Sometimes the students wrote the word by hand on a touchscreen using a digital pen, and sometimes they typed the same word on a keyboard. Every neural response was recorded for the full five seconds the word stayed on screen.

Then her team looked at the part of the data most researchers had ignored for years, which is how different parts of the brain were communicating with each other during the task.

When the students wrote by hand, the brain lit up everywhere at once.

The regions responsible for memory, sensory integration, and the encoding of new information were all firing together in a coordinated pattern that spread across the entire cortex. The whole network was awake and connected.

When the same students typed the same word, that pattern collapsed almost completely.

Most of the brain went quiet, and the connections between regions that had been alive seconds earlier were nowhere to be found on the EEG.

Same word, same brain, same person, and two completely different neurological events.

The reason turned out to be something nobody had really paid attention to before her work. Writing by hand is not one motion but a sequence of thousands of tiny micro-movements coordinated with your eyes in real time, where each letter is a different shape that requires the brain to solve a slightly different spatial problem.

Your fingers, wrist, vision, and the parts of your brain that track position in space are all working together to produce one letter, then the next, then the next.

Typing throws all of that away. Every key on a keyboard requires the exact same finger motion regardless of which letter you are pressing, which means the brain has almost nothing to integrate and almost no problem to solve.

Van der Meer said it plainly in her interviews.

Pressing the same key with the same finger over and over does not stimulate the brain in any meaningful way, and she pointed out something that should scare every parent who handed their kid an iPad.

Children who learn to read and write on tablets often cannot tell letters like b and d apart, because they have never physically felt with their bodies what it takes to actually produce those letters on a page.

A decade before her, two researchers at Princeton ran the same fight using a completely different method and ended up at the same answer. Pam Mueller and Daniel Oppenheimer tested 327 students across three experiments, where half took notes on laptops with the internet disabled and half took notes by hand, before testing everyone on what they actually understood from the lectures they had watched.

The handwriting group won by a wide margin on every question that required real understanding rather than surface recall.

The reason was hiding in the transcripts of what the two groups had actually written down.

The laptop students typed almost word for word, capturing more total content but processing almost none of it as they went, while the handwriting students physically could not write fast enough to transcribe a lecture in real time, which forced them to listen carefully, decide what actually mattered, and put it in their own words on the page.

That single act of choosing what to keep was the learning itself, and the keyboard had quietly skipped the choosing and skipped the learning along with it.

Two studies. Two countries. Same answer.

Handwriting makes the brain work. Typing lets it coast.

Every note you have ever typed instead of written went into your brain through a thinner pipe. Every meeting, every book highlight, every idea you captured on your phone instead of on paper was processed at half depth.

You did not forget those things because your memory is bad. You forgot them because typing never woke the part of the brain that would have made them stick.

The fix is the thing your grandmother already knew.

Pick up a pen. Write the thing down. The slower road is the faster one.

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

The most ridiculous thing I've ever read

When was the last time a man dying for his wife? Was it during his male pregnancy?

🤣🤣🤣

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

@JKaufmann123 @Pribaris Wife are expected to die for their husband too, and go through it multiple times ini their life, even

What do you think child birth is?

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

The last sentence is 🔥🔥🔥
Makanya ga suka sama orang2 yg "sekedar mengingatkan" 🙄

[Anish Moonka @anishmoonka]

When someone teaches you something you didn't ask to learn, your brain reacts like it's in physical pain. UCLA scientists watched it happen on brain scans in 2003. The same wiring that fires when you stub your toe also fires when someone treats you like you need fixing.

Naomi Eisenberger and Matthew Lieberman ran the study and published it in Science. The brain region is the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, which is just the fancy name for your main pain alarm. It doesn't care whether the threat is a hot stove or a friend telling you how to live.

A neuroscientist named David Rock built a framework around this in 2008. Five things make the brain feel safe in social moments: status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness, and fairness. Take away any of those and the alarm fires. Rock wrote that one of the easiest ways to dent someone's status is to give them advice they didn't ask for. Even hinting that they're doing something wrong is enough.

When people are told what to do, they often do the opposite, even when the advice was good. The psychologist Jack Brehm noticed this in 1966, and sixty years of follow-up have confirmed it. The brain is trying to keep your life feeling like your own.

Close friends cut each other off with unsolicited advice in about 70% of supportive conversations, often before the friend has even finished explaining the problem. That number comes from a 2016 study by Bo Feng and Eran Magen in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. The closer the friendship, the worse it gets. And the advice tends to make them more stressed, more depressed, and more lonely, not less.

Giving advice gives the giver a sense of power, even when nobody asked for it. Michael Schaerer and his co-authors, working across Harvard, Duke, INSEAD, USC, and Singapore Management, published this in 2018 after four experiments with about 700 people. People who chase power volunteer advice more often than others. Whether the student actually improves is a side effect, if it happens at all.

So when you feel the urge to teach somebody who never asked, that urge is mostly about you. You walk away feeling a little more powerful. They walk away feeling like they were just told they can't run their own life. Most uninvited teaching is one person's ego dressed up as kindness.

[rinai hujan @deraigerimis]

@godlywomanhood Yes and no
They need to see you happy and fulfilled in your marriage life
They need to see you being loved and respected by your husband, by your children
Just words is not enough, because the girls will see their mother first as the projection of marriage life