Yurash

You do realize Elon owns X, right? Any money he gets from creator monetization is essentially X paying its own owner. 😂

Five people stranded in the snowy mountains of Kazakhstan could have been left without help. A broken SUV, freezing temperatures, and absolutely no mobile signal. But Starlink transmitted their SOS and helped rescuers locate them. A 100 km journey on an all-terrain vehicle — and all five were brought to safety. This is what technology with real value looks like. Meanwhile, with my mobile carrier, I’m afraid to even leave the house. 💀

What’s the point of making a new “Twitter”? When X already has: • millions of active and interesting people, • Grok right in the feed, • real monetization (Premium, ads, creators), • and the whole infrastructure that’s been working for years. The new project (Tweet.app) is still just a small paid “replica” of old Twitter. Even if they add monetization through subscriptions, without a critical mass of users and without everything X already has, the chances of real success look very modest. People won’t switch in large numbers just because “the bird is blue” and they’re called “tweets.” They’re already used to X. And if the new service doesn’t offer proper monetization for creators, it’ll just stay a niche club of a few thousand people. Maybe I’m wrong. But right now it looks more like an attempt to sell nostalgia for money than a real alternative.

Hi @grok Which new AI automation tools are being mentioned most actively on X this week? Include links to the posts with the highest engagement.

Musk is building a research chip fab in Austin. Right at Gigafactory Texas. He admits it himself: many approaches WON'T work. That's the plan. The winners move to Terafab in Grimes County. Whoever iterates faster wins. Everyone else makes slide decks.

“The most lucrative skill has always been capturing attention. If nobody knows who you are or what you offer, how in the world are they going to pay you?” This is the core idea of Dan Koe’s article. He argues that as job security declines, more and more people are turning to personal brands, and those who can systematically capture and hold attention (instead of just chasing one-off viral posts) become the most valuable people in the market. Key points from the article: • Social media is where attention (and money) lives right now. • Instead of constantly chasing virality, you need to build a world of content that people want to keep exploring. • The strongest position today is becoming a “one-person creative team”: brand strategist, content strategist, and content creator all in one (for yourself or for clients). • AI helps, but without strategy, a unique voice, and a deep understanding of the brand, it only creates noise. • The best way to land your first clients is the “permissionless apprentice” approach: do high-quality work for free and put it in front of the right people. In short: attention → trust → money. Everything else is secondary

Musk is holding on to X despite the criticism, the regulators and the politicians. His core argument, if you believe the viral retellings: "Who decides which opinions are right?" It's an uncomfortable question, because nobody can answer it without becoming the censor. So here's one for you: are you for free speech, or for free speech for your own side? @elonmusk

This is me trying to get my life together.

When everything’s going to shit, but @grok said it could’ve been worse.

How to spot the AI bubble for $0 Amazon spent $75.9B on capex in a single quarter, mostly on AWS and AI The game: where the money goes in, where it comes out first steps: •go to: sec. gov/edgar •open Amazon's latest 10-Q •find the Cash Flow Statement •compare "Purchases of property and equipment" with "Net cash provided by operating activities" What not to do: don't count capex as a loss. it's a bet on demand that hasn't arrived yet everyone watches AI revenue. watch how much they burned to get it

A Canadian comedian spent 4 minutes showing how the entire “thought leadership” and TED-talk industry actually works. He walked on stage in a blazer and glasses, made a specific hand gesture, and said outright: “You know I’m a thought leader because I’m wearing a blazer, I have glasses, and I’ve just done this with my hands.” His name is Pat Kelly. It’s a satirical sketch from the CBC show This Is That, shot as a perfect parody of the TED format. He never hid the fact that he had nothing to say. He simply narrated every trick used by thousands of speakers: — He walked over to his laptop because “that way everyone understands I know technology and that there will be slides. And slides make a presentation seem more legitimate than it actually is.” — He told a story about meeting another thought leader who said “I don’t know.” Then he repeated the phrase three times, because “if you repeat it three times, it becomes important.” — He paced the stage, changed his vocal tone, showed a picture of the planet with random text and a number on it, and asked a rhetorical question. — All of it so the audience would believe he knew what he was talking about. At the end he even explained how to get a standing ovation: slow down your speech, lower the volume, and look directly at the audience. The video has millions of views. And it still works perfectly, because the formula hasn’t changed. Public speaking coaches charge thousands of dollars for what Kelly broke down for free on a napkin in 4 minutes: form, gestures, slides, repetition, vocal tone, and confidence in emptiness. The formula is free. The willingness to actually say something concrete is the entire difference.

DO YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THIS? Videos are spreading everywhere claiming “Claude Code found 200k+ long-deleted photos” while the phone shows a green terminal with a progress bar “recovering” everything. All I see are typical AI-generated clips. The creators say “I plugged in the phone and the code found the files,” but the interface looks staged, not like a real process. Yes, thumbnail caches on Android and iOS sometimes stick around, but these dramatic “scanning” videos with progress bars are pure clickbait. Has anyone actually tried this themselves and recovered something real, or is everyone just watching and reposting? 🤔

Scattered minds: what research says about living in "everything at once" mode A game, music in your earbuds, and Reels on a second screen. Researchers call this media multitasking, and short-form video (TikTok, Reels, Shorts) is now studied as a separate factor. What the data shows The largest review so far was published in Psychological Bulletin. It covered 71 studies and 98,299 participants. More frequent short-form video use was linked to poorer cognitive performance (r = −0.34), most strongly for attention (r = −0.38) and inhibitory control (r = −0.41). Inhibitory control is the ability to ignore distractions and stay on task. The link with mental health is weaker (r = −0.21), but the clearest correlations are with stress (−0.34) and anxiety (−0.33). The authors also recorded a link with sleep disturbances. No consistent link with self-esteem or body image was found overall. A possible mechanism The most common explanation is that the brain adapts to rapid context switches and instant reward. This puts more load on the prefrontal cortex, which handles sustained attention. Sleep loss, often tied to late-night scrolling, further weakens self-control. The result is a loop: a scattered brain reaches for fast content, and that content further wrecks sleep and recovery. What about multitasking? Here the picture is more complicated. Ophir's pioneering 2009 study showed that frequent multitaskers filter out irrelevant stimuli worse. Later checks were less clear-cut. A 2017 meta-analysis found only a weak link with distractibility, which became statistically nonsignificant after correcting for small-study bias. A later three-level meta-analysis of 43 studies did confirm worse inhibitory control and working memory in heavy multitaskers, with no difference in cognitive flexibility. Important caveats These are correlations, not proven causation. Impulsive people may simply spend more time on short videos. Many studies rely on self-reported usage, and few accounted for overall social media time. The authors call for experimental and longitudinal studies. This is also not a diagnosis: ADHD or an anxiety disorder is diagnosed by a doctor, not by hours spent on Instagram. Consequences already described in the literature 1Weaker sustained attention and self-control. 2Higher stress and anxiety scores among heavy users. 3Worse sleep. 4Lower academic performance and more procrastination. A review of research from 2019 to 2025 describes a dose-response pattern: the more time spent on short videos, the more pronounced the attention problems. Conclusion The evidence doesn't say a phone breaks your brain. It says that the more fragmented content you consume, the worse the average outcome for attention, stress, and sleep. If you notice you can't finish reading a text, never feel rested, or are constantly anxious, talk to a doctor or psychologist rather than just setting app timers.