levy

if you remember the old grimm fairy tale, rumpelstiltskin could spin straw into gold. he made a deal with a young woman: guess his name and she keeps her baby. at first it seemed impossible. but once his name was spoken, the power shifted. knowing the name changed everything.

researchers alan levinovitz and awais aftab say the same thing happens in real life. giving something a name can give us power over it. especially when it comes to illness. they call this the rumpelstiltskin effect.

why a name feels like relief

think of a headache that lingers for days. or exhaustion that never seems to end. the uncertainty can be scary. what if it’s serious?

but once a doctor gives you a diagnosis, even before treatment starts, you often feel lighter. because now it has a name. a name cuts through the unknown. it makes the struggle real, and it makes sense of the worry.

more than just medicine

a diagnosis doesn’t only launch treatment. it validates the patient. hearing a doctor say it out loud tells you this is not just in your head. that recognition builds strength. studies show people often report higher satisfaction after receiving a clear diagnosis. it’s not only about healing the body. it’s also about calming the mind.

finding your people

a name can also connect you to others. once something has a label, you can search for support groups, talk with people who share the same journey, and feel less alone. a single word can open the door to a community. and sometimes that community is what keeps people going.

the internet twist

today it’s easy to type symptoms into a search bar and come up with a name yourself. that can feel reassuring even without a doctor’s input. levinovitz and aftab note that naming alone can bring comfort.

but it’s not without risks. misdiagnosis online can fuel unnecessary fear. still, the human mind prefers a label over uncertainty.

the power of words

psychology has long known about the placebo effect. believing something will help can make it work. in the same way, simply having a diagnosis can reduce symptoms. sometimes words carry as much weight as medicine.

the shadow side

labels can also hurt. in mental health, some diagnoses carry stigma. instead of empowering, they can isolate. as psychiatrist ronald w. pies reminds us, no one should be reduced to their diagnosis. labels should help people, not trap them.

a new idea still growing

the rumpelstiltskin effect is a new concept. there’s no massive data yet. but early research suggests words might be more powerful than prescriptions.

one day doctors might discover that the most healing thing they offer is not only medicine. it might be the name they give to what you’re going through.

because sometimes, just like in the story, saying the name changes the ending.

inside cristiano ronaldo’s massive al-nassr contract (via the sun)
• guaranteed annual salary: £178 million
• signing bonus: £24.5 million
• 15% ownership stake in the club
• goal bonus: £80,000 per goal (increases by 20% next season)
• assist bonus: £40,000 per assist (increases by 20% next season)
• league title bonus: £8 million if al-nassr wins the league
• golden boot bonus: £4 million if he finishes as top scorer
• asian champions league bonus: £6.5 million if al-nassr qualifies and wins
• private jet expenses covered by the club: (£4 million value)
• £60 million in guaranteed sponsorship deals

personal full-time staff:
• 3 drivers
• 4 housekeepers
• 2 private chefs
• 3 gardeners
• 4 bodyguards

nudge theory is about guiding people without forcing them. place fruit at eye level and people choose it more often. set savings programs to enroll automatically and people save more. small changes in how choices are presented can lead to better decisions. tiny shifts. big results.

for che guevara, revolution wasn't just about winning battles with weapons. it was about planting the seeds of change in the human spirit. he dreamed of a world where no one would exploit another, where the poor, the workers, and the oppressed would finally be free. che didn't fight for short-term victories — he fought to build a future.

in the mountains of cuba, the valleys of bolivia, and the heat of africa, che wasn't just a soldier. he was a teacher. he taught people to read and write, to defend themselves, and most importantly, to resist. because for che, revolution started not on the battlefield, but within the human soul.

but he also knew that ideals alone weren't enough to sustain a revolution. without sacrifice, discipline, and constant struggle, even the most beautiful dreams would fade. he could have lived comfortably after the cuban revolution's success but that's not who he was. he believed the fight wasn't over, so he kept going.

even when he was surrounded in the bolivian mountains with only a handful of comrades, che still believed in the future. in his final moments, he stood tall because for him, revolution was a path you could never turn back from once you began walking it. that path continues today, in the hearts of those who still speak his name and carry his legacy forward.

check out elon musk's whole h-1b drama. remember when he forced twitter employees into a new "take it or leave" agreement? if you look at photos after that ultimatum, you'll see very few white americans left. most of the remaining folks look like they're on h-1b visas. (yeah, i'm guessing from appearances, but let's be real.)

once musk took over twitter, he discovered the "benefits" of using h-1b labor—big-time. he fired a ton of engineers, but someone still had to keep the place running, and that burden fell on these h-1b holders.

why them? because if the boss says "who do you think you are?" and they can't find another job within 60 days, they'll be forced to leave the country. meta did something similar. and if home is india, you can imagine the predicament—when your boss says "jump," you don't have many other options. anyone who's endured six years on h-1b (unless their company files for a green card right away) knows it's not just "go back home." it's more like "good luck making it back here again anytime soon."

even though my own h-1b experience was in the public sector, i've still felt that sense of being stuck. in private companies—especially under ceos like elon musk—some h-1b folks end up in a situation worse than modern indentured servitude. actually, it's just straight-up servitude. if you're from a country like belgium, you might just say "to heck with this" and head home to a decent life. but if you're a young engineer from india, where are you going to go? you can't just bail out and fly home without losing your future here.

anyone who's spent years on an h-1b in the private sector understands this. if these big companies truly cared about improving stem in america, they'd start by fixing our k-12 education instead of constantly importing cheap labor. if they were sincere, they'd solve the ridiculous green card backlog for indian professionals.

but honestly, their main goal is to grab a pliable, underpaid workforce and push down wages for everyone else. musk jump-started that by gutting twitter, and other companies are following his lead.

this book explains, to a large extent, why some societies thrive while others don’t—when combined with average intelligence levels. but why isn’t intelligence alone enough? let me break it down:

we’re all familiar with south and north korea. south korea is incredibly advanced, constantly innovating, producing high-tech goods, and getting wealthier by the day. the country’s per capita income is more than 20 times that of north korea. in fact, due to the poverty and hunger in the north, south koreans are taller and live longer than their northern neighbors. north korea, on the other hand, can’t even feed its people without foreign aid, let alone produce technology.

the reason behind all this is what acemoglu describes as “extractive” and “inclusive” institutions. south korea has inclusive institutions, while north korea is stuck with extractive ones. as a result, while the south is advancing into space, the north is struggling with famine.

but there’s an important point we need to consider: the average iq levels in these two countries. despite north korea’s backwardness and hardships, their average iq is pretty close to that of south koreans. in fact, south koreans have some of the highest average iq levels in the world.

so what does this mean? it means that even after 50+ years of oppressive extractive institutions, north koreans still have an average iq of around 105, just like their neighbors in the south. if north korea’s extractive institutions were to collapse tomorrow (say, north korea reunites with the south), north koreans would likely become just as wealthy, innovative, and successful as south koreans in a short period of time.

this is where the importance of north koreans’ iq comes in. the moment they break free from their extractive system, they have the potential to become one of the most advanced nations in the world. meanwhile, many countries in latin america or eastern europe that are governed by inclusive institutions haven’t reached south korea’s level of development. this is where the average intelligence of a society plays a role.

take brazil, for instance. despite having inclusive institutions like south korea, brazil’s average iq is around 90, not 105 like south korea. that’s why brazil isn’t able to reach the same level of development. so, while inclusive and extractive institutions are key factors in a nation’s growth, average intelligence levels are equally important.

this means that even if countries like brazil have inclusive institutions, they won’t reach south korea’s level of development unless their average iq rises to similar levels. on the other hand, since north korea has high average intelligence, the moment they switch from extractive to inclusive institutions, they’ll skyrocket to south korea’s level.

of course, establishing inclusive institutions requires a certain level of intelligence. the elites who run extractive systems never want to share power, so it’s up to the people to pressure the elites and force them to create inclusive institutions. but for that to happen, the population needs to be aware and capable of demanding change. while some countries in latin america have managed to do this, north koreans haven’t—likely because of east asia’s ultra-conservative, community-over-individual culture.

this conservative, non-individualistic culture stifles creativity in east asia. a simple example is the apple vs. samsung rivalry. apple, a product of western culture, innovates and changes the world, while samsung takes what apple creates and optimizes it. sure, samsung might beat apple with optimized products, but they’ll never make world-changing innovations like apple does. and that’s because of east asia’s conservative culture. could this be linked to genetics? maybe, but research in this area is still too new to draw any firm conclusions.
(see: daron acemoglu)

a scientist who, with every one of his studies, is bound to inspire both admiration and astonishment, in my opinion. i wanted to share one of his studies that surprised me the most. he was the first person to put forth the concept of "the wisdom of the crowd."

in 1906, galton came across an interesting kind of contest at a livestock fair. in this contest, whoever correctly guessed an ox's weight won the prize. about 800 people gave their guesses, and galton noted them all down. but the thing is, not one of them actually came close to the right answer. among these 800 people there were folks like butchers and farmers who could easily estimate an ox's weight, but right alongside them were people who had no clue about the subject.

the ox turned out to weigh about 543 kilograms. the person who made the closest guess took the prize. then galton decided to take the average of all the guesses and compare the result. the average came out to around 542 kilograms. the diverse crowd was smarter than even the best expert's guess.

galton published his findings in a paper, and as a result, the wisdom of crowds was born. these observations helped develop the concepts of the mean and variation, and they led him to formulate the fundamental statistical concept of standard deviation.

i once considered buying a tesla until the u.s. elections made it painfully clear what kind of person elon musk really is. after seeing his behavior and the values he promotes, i couldn't justify supporting him. and i'm not alone. people around the world have been backing away from tesla, with some even going as far as setting their teslas on fire.

in germany alone, tesla sales have dropped by 75%. the company's stock has lost billions of dollars in value. and have you noticed that when you post something critical about tesla on twitter, the engagement seems to disappear? that's not a coincidence.

if you're thinking about buying a tesla, think twice. there are better alternatives out there from companies that don't come with this baggage.

if you're tired of chatgpt constantly telling you things like, "you're actually doing fine," or "don't be so hard on yourself," and you want to hear something brutally honest instead, try this prompt:

"based on everything you know about me, roast me and don't hold back."

then sit back and watch the ai point out the things you've probably been avoiding about yourself for years.

image

today i uploaded a scanned document—a plain white page with text on it—and asked it to "extract the text."

instead, it extracted the text by literally removing all the words and giving me back a completely blank white page.

if it's making mistakes like this on the plus plan, i don't even want to imagine what the free version is doing.

looks or personality?

own republic.

without a doubt one of the best films ever made about war. the thin red line, the film that marked terrence malick's return to the big screen after a long absence, goes far beyond being just an anti-war film and holds deep inquiries into human existence. and indeed, the director's own closeness to philosophy, particularly his engagement with heidegger, is well known to everyone.

a bandit working hard to make sure societies don't talk about their real problems, to make the public fight windmills instead, to keep the actual source of all the trouble, politicians and the rich, off the table. when he had his falling-out with trump, trump revealed that he'd wanted to keep getting government subsidies through the politicians he'd helped get elected by pouring millions into their campaigns.

the windmills here are the culture they've branded as "woke." it's a concept thrown in front of citizens as the enemy while politicians and insatiable types like elon, who want to get even richer through them, rob the public blind. the enemy that used to get pumped into the public through the media they owned now carries on in social media under different labels, courtesy of blue-check trolls.

why'd they make athena black, why'd they cast the sinon character as trans, there's lgbt stuff in the shows... in shows and films full of one-eyed giants, monsters, dragons, and other fictional characters, these are the kinds of issues that don't actually affect people in real life. meanwhile the average citizen in the usa deals with the cost of living, the housing crisis, the immigration issue (which they do talk about, because they can pin the blame on the other side for it), uninsured people being too scared to even call an ambulance because of how brutal the private healthcare system is, mass shootings and high crime rates because guns get sold like candy, the massive student debt faced by people who want to go to college without a scholarship, the country's kids getting sent off to war because the rich keep starting wars to serve their own interests, and so on... these problems just keep on existing. no matter which politician from which party comes to power, since they're funded by the rich, no solution ever gets brought to the table, but the enemy is woke.