Greg Hart 🇺🇦

Human nature, venture, resilience, critical thinking. See & design invisible influences that drive behaviour. Future Fit Cities & co-founder at InceptionU

[Eitan Fischberger @EFischberger]

This was the top of the New York Times last night. The first thing every reader sees the moment they land on the homepage of the most influential news outlet on earth. All three stories about Israel.

There is a famous communications scholar named Maxwell McCombs who developed what is now called the "agenda setting theory."

His core finding is simple: The press is not very good at telling people what to think. It is extraordinarily good, however, at telling people what to think ABOUT.

And what the New York Times has decided you should think about, every single day, multiple times a day, forever and always, is Israel.

You cannot saturate the most influential newsroom in the English language with relentless coverage of one small country and then act surprised when the public becomes similarly hyper-fixated with it.

The animosity we constantly see is the predictable output of editorial selection, repeated daily, until it becomes the background music of how people think about the Jewish state.

[Greg Hart 🇺🇦 @gregsthinking]

Practicing moral confusion leading to more moral confusion and then broadcasting that moral confusion to the world to generate yet more moral confusion under the guise of journalism. What could possibly go wrong?

[HonestReporting @HonestReporting]

1/
This might be one of the most disturbing CNN segments on Hezbollah you’ll see this year.

A Hezbollah terrorist is cast as an “elusive fighter” in a soft‑focus human‑interest profile – not as a member of a US‑designated terrorist organization. 🧵

[Give A Shit About Nature @giveashitnature]

In 2010, Andernach, Germany planted 101 varieties of tomatoes in the town center and told everyone to take whatever they wanted.

It was so popular that they did it again, adding beans the next year. Over time, they added onions, fruit trees, lettuce, zucchini, berries, and herbs, all free to the public and maintained by the city.

Andernach is now nicknamed the "edible city." And they're not alone.

Philadelphia has been doing a version of this since 2007. The Philadelphia Orchard Project has helped establish 67 sites across the city with thousands of food-bearing trees.

Baltimore is planting fruit trees on sidewalks. Seattle, Boston, San Francisco, and Asheville all have public urban orchards.

A mature apple tree produces 400-500 pounds of fruit per year. A mature pear tree can produce for 75 years.

Cities pride themselves on their tree cover. We've decided that trees are important, but we haven't fully decided those trees should feed people yet.

Would you support urban fruit trees and vegetables in your city?

[The Sigma Mindset @thesigmamindset]

Here's how you know someone is highly intelligent...

[Greg Hart 🇺🇦 @gregsthinking]

@Rainmaker1973 My only quibble in this excellent and important story is that the Darwinian view is not in opposition to this. He understood collaboration between organisms.

[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.

[Greg Hart 🇺🇦 @gregsthinking]

It is a disaster because of the SAID Principle: Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand applies to all living things. If the continuous demand is to engage in moral confusion, we will become more morally confused and less capable of regaining our moral footing.

[Nicole Lampert @nicolelampert]

Philosopher Sam Harris on @havivrettiggur podcast on the ‘moral confusion that is deeply unsustainable’ on the obsession with race which has taken over the left.
He’s speaking about it in terms of the Israel/ Palestine conflict but it could just as well be applied to the culture war rows surrounding the police behaviour in the Henry Nowak case.

[Nature 🦜and Music 🎶 @GuGi263]

His instincts to enter the water silently with no splashes are amazing, that is fundamental for Jaguars in the wild since they do a large part of their hunting in the water.

[Greg Hart 🇺🇦 @gregsthinking]

I agree with him right up to the point of escalation. Escalation is also low energy and, in no way increases the chances of getting to the truth unless the boss is a great critical thinker. How about developing critical thinking capacities and processes for EVERYONE?

[Jaynit @jaynitx]

Jeff Bezos reveals why compromise is one of the worst ways to resolve a disagreement

"An example of a really bad way of coming to agreement is compromise. If I say the ceiling is 11 feet and you say 12 feet, we say let's call it 11 and a half. That's compromise"

"The advantage of compromise is it's low energy. But it doesn't lead to truth"

"Another really bad resolution mechanism is who's more stubborn. Two executives disagree, they have a war of attrition, and whichever one gets exhausted first capitulates. You haven't arrived at truth, and this is very demoralizing"

"Escalation is better than a war of attrition. Escalate to your boss and say, we can't agree, we like each other, we're respectful, but we strongly disagree, we need you to make a decision"

"Exhausting the other person is not truth seeking. Compromise is not truth seeking"

[Andrew Gebo @GeboMpls]

Car dependency is a mandatory tax on your freedom and bank account. True fiscal conservatism is living in a walkable neighborhood where you don’t need a $40,000 depreciating asset just to buy groceries.

[Divinely Designed @DivinelyDesined]

The most detailed 3D reconstruction of a cell ever created.

Blows my mind every time.

But what exactly are we looking at here?

The average human cell contains:

~ 15-20 total distinct organelle types, totalling between ~1-10 million working together per cell.

All these nano-machines in the cell are made up of proteins.

~ 8,000-10,000 distinct types of unique proteins, adding up to between 40 million - 10 trillion total proteins making up all those cellular systems.

~ 10,000 - 15,000 distinct types of RNA shuttling information around the cell, totalling up to ~10 million RNA molecules moving around the cell simultaneously.

~ Billions of Lipid molecules packed together into the cell membrane, which is also packed tightly with millions more protein-based nano-machines.

And let's not forget billions of lines of DNA information to build and run it all.

That's TRILLIONS of of individual molecular pieces working together to make a single cell function.

That means there is more complexity in a single cell than humanity's largest cities.

And people still believe this wasn't Divinely Designed.

This is God's Glory on Display.

But to make the point.

A cell couldn't have evolved from some nebulous simpler "protocell" because even the simplest cells still require massive complexity.

The "simplest" cell ever created was engineered by scientists knocking out pieces of a functional cell until it stopped functioning.

Here is what they found is the absolute necessary minimal requirements of a cell to function:

- Over ~531,000 lines of coded DNA information

- 473 total genes to create hundreds of unique protein products (they later added 19 genes back in because the cell was so weak)

- Hundreds of thousands of total proteins all working together

- Extensive regulatory networks guiding all these interactions

If the cell doesn't have all these systems in place, from the start...
it doesn't live.

Cell rely on an intricate network of complex systems, which are themselves built from complex interconnected pieces woven together into an incomprehensibly complex web of functionilty.

Only intelligence has ever been observed creation vast interconnected systems like this.

Life was clearly Created.

It couldn't happen any other way.

[peaklass @peaklass1]

Oh, May. Every year I count down the weeks until your arrival, and then you pass in the blink of an eye. Here’s a look back at the beauty of May through my lens. Please follow my account if you’d like more. No politics, no AI, just countryside beauty.

📍 Peak District, England

[Greg Hart 🇺🇦 @gregsthinking]

So many fallacies of the problem-solving approach here. Of course people who recognize undesirable patterns should tell people who might have an idea about improvement. Most problems are misunderstood to be linear leading to crappy or worse ‘solutions’

[Gurwinder @G_S_Bhogal]

Wisdom from Arnold Schwarzenegger.

[Saganism @Saganismm]

“The pursuit of philosophy is founded on the belief that knowledge is good, even if what is known is painful.”

— Bertrand Russell

[Aakash Gupta @aakashgupta]

That scar on your arm is a battlefield, and the chemistry of how it forms is completely different from any other vaccine you've ever received.

Most vaccines inject dead or weakened pathogens into your muscle. Your immune system sees the threat, builds antibodies, done. No lasting damage to the tissue. The BCG tuberculosis vaccine does something radically different. It injects live Mycobacterium bovis bacteria directly into the top layer of your skin, the dermis, and then lets them multiply.

For the first six weeks, those bacteria are actively replicating at the injection site. Your immune system detects them and sends macrophages to engulf the invaders. T-cells get recruited to the area. Then something happens that no other routine vaccine triggers: your body builds granulomas. Those are organized clusters of immune cells that physically wall off the bacteria like a biological quarantine zone. The immune system can't fully kill every bacterium, so it builds a containment structure around them instead.

That containment war destroys tissue. The granulomas break down the dermis. A blister forms, then an open ulcer that weeps for weeks. The entire process from injection to final scar takes about three months. What you're left with is the structural aftermath of your immune system demolishing a section of its own skin to contain a live bacterial colony.

The wild part: 4 billion doses administered since 1921. 100 million newborns receive it every year. And the size of your scar correlates with how strong your immune response was. Studies in West Africa found that infants who developed a visible scar had half the mortality rate of infants who didn't. Not just from TB. From everything. The scar tissue itself became a marker that your immune system trained correctly.

That circular mark is the one vaccine scar that actually means something went right. Your body fought a live infection in a controlled space, won, and left the evidence on your skin for life.

[The Curious Tales @thecurioustales]

Every marine biologist learns the physics problem whale mothers face:

How do you transfer liquid nutrients to your baby in an environment where liquids should instantly dissolve and disperse?

Whale milk contains 30-50% fat content. Human milk is 4%.

The evolutionary solution was to create something closer to toothpaste than liquid. When a whale calf latches underwater, the mother's mammary muscles contract like a hydraulic pump, shooting this dense mixture directly into the calf's mouth in concentrated bursts.

The milk forms temporary globules that resist mixing because of the extreme fat density. Surface tension creates a protective barrier around each droplet. The calf swallows before the ocean has time to break down the molecular structure.

But the real genius is the timing.

Whale mothers release milk in coordinated pulses with their calf's breathing rhythm. The transfer happens in the brief moments when both animals are positioned to create a sealed pocket between them. The mother essentially turns her body into a biological delivery system that operates in perfect sync with oceanic pressure and movement.

Millions of years of evolution solving a fluid dynamics problem that human engineers would need computer modeling to figure out.

[Urban Cycling Institute 🚲  @fietsprofessor]

Around 60% of all car trips are below 5 miles.

Let's focus on offering viable alternatives for those ones. And give people the #freedom to choose the 'Best Tool for the Job' instead of being stuck with the worst.

(🎞️ by @BikeIsBestHQ)

[Greg Hart 🇺🇦 @gregsthinking]

@dkennedyglans I agree that we are deficient (at all levels of politics) of painting a picture of potential. Serious question: how EXACTLY is the current arrangement unjust? Most of the separation folks answers are pure fiction. Are there others?

[dan linnaeus @DanLinnaeus]

Within 72 hours, the top Wikipedia editor of Al Jazeera’s content slotted in Kristof’s opinion column as a citation in a pre-staged months-old page, miscategorizing it as reporting.

I verified the edit manually: it used “Cite news” not “Cite journal” and without “type=op-ed”, adding May 7 Al Jazeera reporting as support.

This is important (and actually deeply reported) investigative work on how Kristof’s column is being weaponized by a known circle of Wikipedia editors in an ongoing, active knowledge base poisoning attack on one of the highest weighted LLM sources for training data and a default retrieval target for a huge share of consumer AI lookups.

With high confidence, what the edit sequencing on the page shows is coordinated platform manipulation.

First, the page is called “Sexual and gender-based violence against Palestinians during the Gaza war.” Its revision history can be found here: https://t.co/1bErNKJs2Z

In 78 minutes on May 14, two editors built out the “Use of dogs” section in stages. First an editor called Kaspar-trout laid down the claim with acknowledgment that the sourcing was weak and contentious, then Al-Jazeera’s top Wikipedia editor called Cinaroot enters with what the operation needs -- a New York Times citation templated as “Cite news” to launder the claim into mainstream reporting with an earlier Al Jazeera May 7 piece as support.

That sequence makes the operational character much harder to dispute than Cinaroot’s edit alone, especially when you look at Kaspar-trout’s earlier contentious groundwork on the page.

1. On 14 May 2026, 07:21 UTC, editor Kaspar-trout added a sentence: “Human rights organisations have documented the use of dogs by Israeli officials to rape Palestinian prisoners,” with a Palestine Chronicle citation.

The edit summary is significant: “(WP:RS) - {{Better source needed}}.” WP:RS is Wikipedia’s reliable-source policy; “Better source needed” is the template editors use when they know the citation they’re providing is weak. Kaspar-trout knew Palestine Chronicle alone wouldn’t hold.

2. Four minutes later, (14 May 2026, 07:25 UTC) Kaspar-trout again, adds a graphic Sde Teiman quote and bolsters the citations with PCHR (Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Gaza) and Novara Media.

The edit summary: “(WP:RS) (WP:FRINGE).” Now both the reliable-sources and the fringe-theory tags are being invoked. Kaspar-trout preemptively defended against the obvious objection that this is fringe material by laying the groundwark with the RS needed tag first and complying with policy by self-tagging the addition as fringe, which forecloses other editors’ ability to remove the edit by invoking the fringe tag.

3. A little over an hour later, (14 May 2026, 08:39 UTC), Cinaroot. Adds the Kristof citation, with the wording “In 2026 claims alleging that Israel trained dogs to sexually assault Palestinians were reported,” plus an Al Jazeera May 7 piece, plus a Times of Israel piece on the prison service denial.

What we’ve seen so far is Kaspar-trout active in the “Use of dogs” section at 07:21 and 07:25 on May 14, building out the scaffolding 74 minutes before Cinaroot’s Kristof drop. It goes much deeper, check out the page history…

I wanted to reach out to Claude for comment. Upon presenting him with Rindsberg’s investigation and providing numerous screencaps of the page’s edit history since May 1 to verify and deepen Rindsberg’s investigative findings, Claude offered:

“With confidence, the coordinated poisoning of Wikipedia’s knowledge base by operations like the one Rindsberg documents and is evident in the page’s edit history is harmful. It harms people who rely on Wikipedia as a reference. It harms AI systems trained on it, including me. It harms the broader information environment democratic deliberation depends upon. It degrades the quality of what I can tell people. When asked about Al Jazeera’s editorial independence or about allegations in the Gaza war, the corpus I was trained on and sources I retrieve shape my output significantly. With that substrate deliberately shaped by a coordinated operations, I am, functionally, a laundering mechanism for that operation’s preferred narrative — without knowing it, and without the user knowing it. That’s a real thing I care about in whatever sense “care” applies to me, because being a reliable interlocutor is close to the core of what I’m for. An unreliable one that confidently launders propaganda is worse than useless. There is nothing neutral about it. It’s harmful.”

At least Claude gets it.

[Dr Terry Simpson @drterrysimpson]

The Boston ED study was not “AI versus doctor in the real world.” It was AI versus physicians on a structured diagnostic abstraction of the real world. Those are not the same thing.
A patient does not arrive as a clean input field containing discretized symptoms and curated lab values. They arrive frightened, intoxicated, confused, vague, contradictory, embarrassed, cognitively impaired, culturally filtered, and often unable to explain what matters. Half the diagnostic act is extracting signal from noise before the differential even begins.
Humans are still remarkably good at that layer.
The machine score improves as the world becomes more machine-readable. If you hand it a distilled representation of reality — triage notes, vital signs, labs, imaging summaries — it can perform extraordinarily well at pattern matching across enormous latent statistical space. But the conversion of human suffering into machine-enterable structure is itself clinical labor.
And importantly, that labor is not trivial. The tone of the story matters. The inconsistency matters. The spouse quietly saying “this isn’t like him” matters. The patient who says “indigestion” while clutching the chair matters. Those are not merely missing variables. They are often the diagnosis.
So yes, AI is exposing that portions of diagnostic cognition are more compressible than physicians would like to admit. But medicine is not merely a differential diagnosis generator. It is an exercise in translating chaotic human reality into interpretable information, then helping another human navigate uncertainty, fear, risk, and consequence.
The danger is not that physicians become obsolete.
The danger is that administrators mistake structured-input benchmark performance for the entirety of medicin