$rklb @RocketLab Rocket Lab의 시작 거대한 Electron도, Neutron도 아니었다. 첫 로켓 Atea🚀 Atea는 마오리어로 “우주(space)” 발사일: 2009년 11월 30일 발사 장소: 뉴질랜드 Great Mercury Island 종류: 서브오비탈(궤도 진입 X) 사운딩 로켓 높이: 약 6m 목표 고도: 약 120km 뉴질랜드 최초 민간 우주 발사 사실상 차고 스타트업 수준의 도전 여기서 시작해 지금은 재사용 로켓, 위성, 우주 시스템까지 만드는 풀스택 우주기업으로 성장. 작은 실험용 로켓 하나가 오늘의 Rocket Lab을 만들었다. 🚀

I use this to help folks understand how the brain is a theater recreating a highly edited world based on a Shannon Limit of human bandwidth of consciousness. Observe the specimen sequence. What are your observations? Now cover one image.

No. This is not actually a choice that women need to make. Almost everyone is confused about this, because the actual, functional mating customs of civilized humanity were almost entirely lost in the baby boomer great reset. In civilized humans, courtship between the sexes is initiated by the female. This is why civilized men hate cold approaching, and only r-selecting knuckledraggers are comfortable with the practice... along with men who have killed off their natural distaste for it because they had to learn it out of sheer necessity. Women generally hate this idea, because they don't like cold approaching, either. But I did not say cold approach. I said "initiate". What a woman is supposed to do, according the customs of actual civilization with functional mating rituals, is see a man she thinks she might like, and covertly signal an invitation to approach. This invitation is the first measure of a graceful social dance, where the steps are known to both partners. The signal is to be clear enough that the man understands its intent, but subtle enough that it can be plausibly denied if he proves to be distasteful on closer examination. It is then the man's responsibility to overtly approach and court. But this is not a cold approach, because he knows he has been invited. His responsibility is to not screw up a good beginning. Thus, no one is cold approaching. Look at the cartoon. You've seen it before. And this indeed how it works... but only in a broken culture. Because when both sexes understand their roles, the difference between the top and bottom panels isn't whether the man is objectively attractive or not, but whether Susan dropped a hint. The reason things work this way now is that Susan was brought up without the slightest inkling of what she was supposed to do. In fact, if you told her now that she's supposed to know how to accidentally drop a handkerchief, she'd probably resent the implication that she has any duties or bears any responsibility for doing anything at all. But power and responsibility together in both directions. If women have no responsibility to invite an approach, then they have no power to control who approaches them. And this is a power they desperately want. This is the true reason why they complain about how being approached is "creepy". They have an instinctive sense that men they don't want are not supposed to make a pass, but they have no idea how this is supposed to not happen. So they try to leave it to men to work out. And men, like women, and like every other carbon-based life form on the planet, are noted for their inability to read minds. There is no individual solution to a broken collective. Dire misunderstandings between men and women trying to find mates are simply one more symptom of the disease that caused the late twentieth century West to try to wipe the cultural slate clean, and reinvent all social customs from an undifferentiated soup of naive postwar liberalism. An individual woman who learns to drop a hint — and more importantly, understands that she should — is still powerless to force men around her to learn to pick one up, or to refrain from being a sex pest when she doesn't drop one. An individual man who learns to spot a hint is still powerless to read the minds of women who don't even know they are supposed to drop one, much less how. Humans, unlike almost all other animals, are not creatures of instinct alone. We are evolved to develop and use rituals. And thus we need to have those rituals, and to transmit them to the next generation. Or we will not thrive. Did every culture have a genteel lexicon of hints and winks and dropped handkerchiefs and how to hold a lace fan? Of course not. Mongol horse archers would think this was all effete nonsense. But Mongol horse archers never invented the radio or the airplane or machine tools or the air conditioner, either. So who cares what they would have thought? We had a way of courting. It was a dance, not a war. It worked. People were happy with it. Then some hippies decided it didn't work with their abstract and stupid philosophy. So it all had to go. And now even conservatives don't always remember what it is we're supposed to be conserving.

Thank you @elonmusk for recognising my work. I thought you might like to hear a little more about it.

Jorge Luis Borges on the riches of English

Much of cortical neuroscience is quietly shifting abstraction layers. This review makes it clear that cortical activity is better understood as wave dynamics on a constrained manifold rather than as neuron-by-neuron computation. Traveling waves, standing waves, and their superpositions are not epiphenomena, they are the functional degrees of freedom the brain actually uses. The deeper implication is that cognition does not arise from local control signals, but from which spatiotemporal modes are permitted, stabilized, or suppressed by global boundary conditions. Neurons shape the medium and its constraints, but meaning lives in the structure of the modes themselves. From this perspective: - perception corresponds to stabilized standing wave patterns - information flow corresponds to traveling waves shaped by geometry - task switching reflects boundary reconfiguration, not rewiring - psychological state reflects global mode occupancy, not firing intensity Directionality, coherence, and integration emerge naturally from geometry and anisotropy, without requiring a central controller or executive signal. Causality flows from constraints to dynamics, not the other way around. What’s striking is how seamlessly this framework bridges physics, physiology, and psychology, while quietly demoting rate-based, localized explanations to secondary effects. The cortex behaves less like a network issuing instructions, and more like a resonant field exploring its allowed configurations. This isn’t a speculative leap. It’s the unavoidable consequence of treating the brain as a continuous, bounded medium, and it suggests that understanding cognition is fundamentally a boundary-condition problem, not a wiring diagram problem. @AFornito @NeuroCellPress @KarlFristonNews @gyorgybuzsaki

Is entropy subjective? Entropy is core to the laws of thermodynamics and the arrow of time. And yet, some physicists argue that entropy actually depends on who is measuring it. Could it really be the case that such a fundamental aspect of the laws of physics is subjective?! I addressed this question in my talk at the Rationalist Festival (Rat Fest) 2025, organised by @ConjectureInst. Watch here or on the YouTube link below!

Human visual cortex representations may be much higher-dimensional than earlier work suggested, but are these higher dimensions of cortical activity actually relevant to behavior? Our new paper tackles this. 🧵(1/n) cell.com/current-biology/ful…

🚨 This paper just murdered the foundation of every AI model you've ever used. A researcher proved you can match Transformer performance WITHOUT computing a single attention weight. Here's what changed (and why this matters now):

Not surprising that Chomsky was so dismissive of LLMs when he wrote about them in 2023 (many of his criticisms turned out to be wrong): archive.is/AgWkn

This is life arising from non-living matter ("abiogenesis") in a computer program and it looks just like a phase transition in statistical mechanics. Some argue grounding and special properties of chemstry are required, but what if life is an "inevitability of computation"? @blaiseaguera's BFF experiments suggest "life emerges" from randomness via gelation dynamics 🧬

🧠➡️🤖 This paper shows how oscillatory sync can power “HoloGraph” a brain-inspired model outperforming classic #GNNs on complex structures nature.com/articles/s41467-0… #AI

An AI pioneer, Yann Lecun, says his field has been led astray by Large Language Models (since they are not based on factual models of the world, but only on massive correlations and abstractions from them). As a cognitive scientist, I'm sympathetic. wsj.com/tech/ai/yann-lecun-a… via @WSJ