cara

karolina olsson went to bed in sweden in 1876 at 14 years old and, according to the historical record, did not properly wake again until 1908, 32 years later. what makes the story even stranger is that after waking she could still read and write, remembered what she had learned before the episode, and was later described as mentally intact.

the part i find most fascinating is that we still do not really know what those 32 years were. sleep, catatonia, an unusual psychiatric condition, something partly performed, or some combination of things? even contemporary accounts left major questions unanswered. there is something deeply unsettling about a life containing three decades that nobody, including the person who lived them, can fully explain.

one of those judges whose name is much less famous than the idea his ruling helped protect. in 1982, william overton struck down an arkansas law that required public schools to give creation science balanced treatment with evolution. what makes the decision especially interesting is that he did not just say creationism was religious. he tried to articulate what makes something science in the first place: it has to deal with the natural world, be testable, remain open to revision, and be falsifiable. a courtroom ended up becoming a surprisingly important place for defining the boundary between belief and scientific inquiry.

i think you should.

back in college, a group of our friends got into a really bad car crash. the mercedes rolled several times and was completely totaled.

there were five people in the car. only one of them ended up spending a few weeks in the hospital because he was not wearing a seat belt and got thrown out through the window.

the other four, including the people sitting in the back, were wearing theirs.

they walked away without so much as a bloody nose.

spending 18 years in the s&p 100 and then basically being told, “you’re not top 100 anymore,” is a pretty brutal slap in the face for nike.

the company was worth around $264 billion in 2021. now it is closer to $57 billion.

the interesting part is not that nike is disappearing. it is that one of the most recognizable sports brands in the world has lost some of its old dominance while hoka, on, adidas, and chinese brands have gained ground.

and nike is still nike. the swoosh is still one of the most recognizable logos on earth.

the problem is not brand awareness.

people just do not seem to have the same “if it is nike, i want it” mentality anymore.

so nike’s real challenge is not being recognized.

it is becoming the brand people actively choose again.

it was the coolest for years...

whatever went wrong, it happened sometime in the last 10 or 15 years.

making a foldable phone and not calling it ifold is a complete lack of vision.

no face id, no haptic feedback, and no earpiece speaker for regular phone calls.

so you are either on speakerphone in public like an asshole or carrying airpods everywhere.

the kind of movie you can’t watch while eating chips or popcorn. the dialogue is so valuable that if even a single word gets lost under the rustling of a bag or any other noise, you end up rewinding because you’re convinced you missed something important. definitely one of the movies that affected me the most. hats off to everyone behind it.

--spoiler--
the idea is to remain in a state of constant departure while always arriving. it saves on introductions and goodbyes.
--spoiler--

i think i've been spending way too much time on instagram lately, because once again, after seeing some random instagram post, i somehow ended up thinking about manipulation.

does anyone else feel like we've been hearing that word way too much lately, or have i just been exposed to it more than usual? whether i'm reading posts online, taking advice from instagram psychologists, or sitting around talking about problems with friends, it's always the same words:

"manipulation, manipulative, manipulator."

actually, another one just came to mind: regulate. but i like that one. regulate yourself. regulate your emotions. struggle to regulate, but regulate anyway. i used it in a post a few months ago, got it out of my system, and i still think it sounds kind of cool.

anyway, back to manipulation.

whenever people talk about problems in relationships, this seems to be the word that comes up first. people have no problem accusing the other person of being manipulative, but in reality, nobody really knows who is what. i guess it has always been like this. maybe we just didn't call everything manipulation before. or maybe we did and i was completely clueless.

i've used the word myself plenty of times, of course. and i haven't just used it casually in a sentence either. i've definitely labeled people as manipulators before. the funny part is that i've also been accused of being manipulative myself. so good luck figuring out who's actually right.

and apparently these manipulative assholes are everywhere. the sneaky ones, the calculating ones, everyone has their own little game going. you've got people messing with your head under the excuse of "i'm only doing this for your own good." people who look perfectly well intentioned. people who have practically written the textbook on playing the victim. people who twist your words, interrupt you, reshape everything you say, and somehow make it work in their favor. then there are the ones who look you straight in the eye and somehow make reality do a backflip.

every flavor is represented. sweet lies, ugly lies, white lies, colorful lies, tactics, labels, psychological terms. whatever you're looking for, apparently it's all here.

1- breaking bad
2- the sopranos
3- mad men
4- game of thrones
5- six feet under

it's one of those brutal truths about human relationships that almost never fails: you can usually tell how someone feels about you by the quality of the time they give you and the number of excuses they make.

the first sign is that every conversation starts feeling like a one-sided tennis match. you're always the one reaching out, asking questions, trying to keep the conversation alive, while their replies never go beyond "yeah," "uh-huh," "cool," or "that's nice." every response is a dead end. they don't ask about your life, your thoughts, or how you're doing, because, simply put, they're not interested.

the second—and probably biggest—sign is the classic excuse: "i've just been so busy." more often than not, what that really means is, "i don't have time for you." people naturally make time for what matters to them. even the busiest person can usually find ten minutes for someone they genuinely care about. if you're always at the bottom of their priority list and every plan gets postponed or canceled, the message is usually pretty clear.

kissing a baby's big toe sticking out of a torn sock.

freedom and breath.

taking photos.

if we're going to think in terms of a single trait, i'd say clarity. man or woman, no difference, i love a clear person. because clarity brings naturalness, honesty, transparency, sincerity, humility, empathy, and genuineness along with it. just as a clear person won't bother with empty matters, in their relationships there's no inconsistency, scheming, or indecision either. a clear person is plain, simple, and natural. they're a genuine person, free of affected behavior and staged emotions.