Giuseppe Santonocito

Psicologo psicoterapeuta coach.
Da oltre 20 anni nel campo del cambiamento personale e della psicologia.

[​𝐥𝐲𝐫𝐚 @sunnkssdseraph]

One day, your home will be empty, and someone will have to decide what to do with your things. They'll open your drawers. They'll find the watch you treasured so much, the car you spent three years paying off, and the clothes you saved for special occasions because you didn't want to wear them out. And they'll make three piles: what to sell, what to give away, and what to throw away. None of it goes with you. Not a single thing. The only thing that goes with you is that afternoon you stayed talking for hours and didn't even realize where the time went. The look on your mom's face when you showed up to visit her without telling her you were coming. Don't collect things... Collect moments with the people you love

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@Math_files Peak autism

[Madame Susanne @Susanne30521946]

Nicklas Nilsson förklarar skillnaden mellan höger och vänstermänniskor i klockren text på Facebook:

"Om en högerpolitisk person är bög, så är han det, och bryr sig inte om vad andra tycker.
Om en vänster är bög, så kräver han lagändringar, protesterar mot allt och alla, och gör det till en politisk kamp.

Om en höger är vegan, så äter han helt enkelt inte kött.
Om en vänster är vegan, så vill han förbjuda kött, stoppa matproduktionen och protestera utanför bondgårdar och hönsfarmer.

Om en höger inte gillar vapen, så köper han inga.
Om en vänster inte gillar vapen, så försöker han förbjuda dem, hindra alla andra från att äga ett, och hatar dem som har.

Om en höger oroar sig för klimatet, så flyger han mindre, kör elbil om det passar honom och sorterar sitt avfall.

Om en vänster oroar sig för klimatet, så vill han förbjuda fossilbilar, flygresor och kött för alla andra, protestera utanför fabriker och kräva att staten tvingar fram förändringen.

Om en höger vill ge sina barn en bra skolgång, så flyttar han till ett område med bra skolor, eller väljer en privatskola eller engagerar sig själv.
Om en vänster vill ge sina barn en bra skolgång, så kräver han mer skattepengar från alla, lika resultat för alla, förbud mot friskolor och protesterar mot varje skillnad.

Om en höger klagar på sitt jobb eller arbetsplats.. det gör han det inte. Han byter jobb eller startar ett eget företag.
Om en vänster klagar på sitt jobb – så är det chefen, företaget eller kollegorna det är fel på. Han kräver kollektivavtal, strejk, förändringar för hela orten och protesterar mot företaget så att det ska passa honom.

Om en höger är missnöjd med sin bostad eller hyra, så flyttar han, renoverar eller köper något annat.
Om en vänster är missnöjd med sin bostad eller hyra, så kräver han hyresstopp, mer bidrag, regleringar för alla och protesterar mot hyresvärdar och politiker.

Om en höger misslyckas med en affär eller en investering som går snett, så reser han sig upp, dammar av sig och försöker igen imorgon.
Om en vänster har slut på pengar den 24:e, så skyller han på att de rika har för mycket och måste bidra mer, skyller på att lotterivinsten inte gick hem förra veckan och muttrar att han har så himla otur.

Om en höger ser det här – så skickar han det till några kompisar för ett gott skratt.
Om en vänster ser det här – så försöker han argumentera emot, få det bortplockat och radera mig från Facebook."

[The Patriots Voice 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 🇬🇧 @Proudofthisland]

🚨 Elon just nuked the entire media playbook in under 90 seconds.

Journalist: “You support the far-right!”

Elon: “No. You support the lunatic left.

What was completely normal 10-15 years ago is now called ‘far-right’…

because your side went completely insane.”

Safe cities. Secure borders. Biological reality. Common sense.

None of that is “far-right.”

It’s just not crazy.

The Overton window didn’t shift right.

The left sprinted off a cliff and started calling everyone who didn’t jump “extremists.”

Elon said it out loud.

And the media still can’t cope.

Lunatic left.

He’s 100% right.

@elonmusk 👏🏻

[⭕ Brock Pierson @brockpierson]

How come everyone forces introverts to leave their comfort zone for a while but no one forces extroverts to shut the fuck up for a while

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@ZorveX_Trader PGS

[Ihtesham Ali @ihteshamali]

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.

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@Mangan150 Is this valid for any type of cancer?

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@celestialbe1ng Five years ago I was in Warsaw with my wife. We were strolling near a Hard Rock Café when she tripped over her loose trousers and fell. A girl soon came over and asked her if she was ok and if we needed help. Luckily, nothing serious, but yes, it was unexpected in a big city.

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

Alti obiettivi.
Massimo impegno.
Zero aspettative.

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@stats_feed Amarone > Barolo

[Kpaxs @Kpaxs]

Asking is the closest thing to a cheat code in real life as it has asymmetric payoffs: no downside, infinite upside.

If you ask and the answer is no, you're exactly where you started. If you ask and the answer is yes, you've gained something. The expected value of asking is almost always positive.

And yet we don't ask. Why?

Because we've internalized a false belief: that asking and being rejected is worse than not asking at all. We treat "no" as a punishment rather than as information.

But here's what actually happens when you ask for things:

• 40% of the time: They say yes
• 30% of the time: They say no, but suggest an alternative
• 20% of the time: They say no
• 10% of the time: They ignore you

In 70% of cases, you're better off than if you hadn't asked. In 20% of cases, you're exactly where you started. In 10% of cases, you're slightly worse off (you wasted the time to compose the message).

Once you internalize this, asking becomes automatic. Not asking becomes the thing that needs justification.

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@dylanmallman The hard problem isn't cognition.
Cognition is the soft problem.

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@obernardodev @_alissonryan Você confia nele também para as campanhas Google Ads? Eu queria fazer a mesma coisa, mas estou com receio dele começar a gastar sem controle ou até piorar o resultado.

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

Instagram => Guarda come sono bello/bravo
YouTube => Guarda come si fa
Facebook => Guarda come sono antico
X => Guarda come sono intelligente
TikTok => Guarda come sono scemo
LinkedIn =>

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@sudoingX Could it be worth getting a used 24GB 3090 instead of a 12GB 3060? The cost is different, but I’m wondering whether it might be worth it for running models that handle 3–4 agents for marketing use.

[Howard Luks MD @hjluks]

I’ve been an orthopedic surgeon for nearly 30 years, and a few patterns have become impossible to ignore. One is that many musculoskeletal problems in adults aren’t sudden injuries. They’re the moment when declining capacity and awful metabolic health finally reveals itself.

Over the decades your strength fades, muscle mass declines, as your aerobic capacity tanks. Tendons and connective tissues lose substance, stiffness, and resilience. For years the body compensated... quietly. Then one day a knee hurts during a run to get the train, or shoulder aches reaching overhead, or a back tightens lifting something simple.

At that point the story usually becomes more about structural damage. An MRI gets ordered. Welcome to high-tech, low-medicine. And the MRI almost always finds something. A meniscus tear. A rotator cuff tear. A disc bulge. Why? Because by midlife these findings are extremely common — even in people with no pain at all. If you have a tear in one shoulder, image the other shoulder... you probably have the same tear there. But I digress.

Once the scan appears, the narrative changes. The image becomes the diagnosis. Now the patient believes something is broken, and the focus often shifts to fixing what the MRI shows.

What often gets lost in this is the reason the symptoms appeared in the first place. Many so-called “atraumatic” orthopedic complaints are not purely mechanical failures. They are the moment when reduced strength, declining tissue capacity, and sometimes broader metabolic health issues finally reach a tipping point. Our tissues change over the decades... get over it.

In other words, the MRI didn’t create the problem. Well... it sort of did in this scenario. But all the MRI showed was something that was already there.... because of your age, lifestyle, health and so on.

The real driver of symptoms is often loss of physiologic reserve. Less muscle. Less tendon or aerobic resilience. Less tolerance for load, etc.

Once the MRI enters the picture, the risk becomes overtreatment. This is probably the number one reason people have surgery. When in many cases the most powerful intervention was never the scan or the procedure.

It was rebuilding capacity.

Strong muscles stabilize joints. Aerobic fitness improves metabolic health and tissue perfusion. Gradual loading restores tolerance.

But people often don't take PT seriously prior to surgery. They often take PT very seriously afterwards. Therefore, PT is probably the reason you feel better, despite the surgery.

The irony is that the treatment many people ultimately need is the same thing that might have prevented the problem in the first place.

Staying strong. Staying active. Maintaining the reserve that protects our joints/tendons/muscles/abilities as we age.

[Machiavelli Bot @UnmodernmanBot]

One of the most important skills you can develop is delayed reaction, because the ability to feel anger, fear, desire, or insecurity without immediately acting on it creates a gap where judgment replaces impulse, and that gap is where power is forged.

[Machiavelli Bot @UnmodernmanBot]

When you become competent, you gain the most underrated privilege: you stop rushing. Rushing is what insecure men do to prove they matter. Competence lets you move slowly, choose better, and stay calm while others panic. The room feels that calm and reads it as authority, because it usually is.

[Giuseppe Santonocito @gsanto_fi]

@aestheticprimal @grok can you confirm?