It’s official—artificial intelligence is one of the top 10 fears in the United States. Well, it’s technically two of the top 10 fears, according to the 12th annual Chapman University Survey of American Fears.

First conducted in 2014, the recurring questionnaire tracks yearly anxiety trends that often range from everyday concerns to existential terrors. This year, 61.1 percent of over 1,200 respondents once again cited “corrupt government officials” as their biggest fear—the same subject was last year’s number one entrant as well as its 11th year on the list. After that, it’s the fear of another world war (51.9 percent). However, “AI harming the political process” wasn’t too far behind for third place at 51.9 percent. The technocentric worry is now essentially tied with the fear of loved ones becoming gravely ill (51.8 percent).

That said, the survey’s own plus or minus 3.79 percentage point margin of error complicates the results a bit. Taking the margin of error into consideration, it’s a tossup when trying to definitively rank the list’s third through tenth fears. Regardless, about 49.7 percent survey takers are also anxious about AI negatively impacting the economy—a double dose of AI-centric woes for the first time in the survey’s history. It’s also the first year researchers at Chapman University in California included questions about AI, but they made it clear it likely won’t be the last.

“As artificial intelligence becomes more integrated into everyday life, understanding these fears will be increasingly important,” said Chapman University sociologist and survey creator Christopher Bader. “We expect concerns about AI to remain a significant part of the national conversation in the years ahead.”

It’s understandable why AI currently vexes so many people. The blanket term now encompasses everything from photorealistic fake images, to dubious search engine chatbots, to nebulous doomsday warnings. Despite these worries, the AI industry’s biggest threats arguably remain the rampant spread of misinformation, coupled with a lack of meaningful regulations or oversight.

But no matter your top technological fear, survey organizers still believe the annual report highlights a very relatable human emotion.

“What I’m seeing more and more over time is that our fear about our loved ones is going to always be there, no matter what’s going on in the world,” said sociologist Ashley Kranjac, director of Chapman University’s Earl Babbie Research Center.

The post For the first time, artificial intelligence is a top 10 fear in the U.S. appeared first on Popular Science.

Children with ADHD showed more erratic pupil responses, a pattern that shifted with medication.

As far as completely pointless ways to kill time on your phone, this is certainly one of the weirdest on record.

Behold the all-new invention of so-called “dopamine sites” — digital domains where you can browse and hunt for deals on nonexistent wares and services. Clothes, food delivery, you name it: you can pretend-shop for it all. 

You don’t actually buy anything, crucially. You’re just pretending to have money to buy the things you want. It’s window-shopping reimagined for the age of doomscrolling.

But it’s also a little more than that. These cleverly-built sites simulate the experience down to checking out and “tracking” your shipment or delivery, and their absurdly realistic rituals can help people become more conscious of their spending habits. Supposedly. 

The trend, according to the New York Times, originated in South Korea this spring, when Park Seohyun, a 21-year-old mechanical engineering student in Seoul, created a fake food-delivery site called “Food Never Arrives.” (It’s now an app).

Originally intended as a joke, she says, it lets you not only order nonexistent food, but provides you an estimate of the money and calories you saved by skipping on the real thing. 

In a wintry economic climate, it became an unexpected hit.

“People began sharing it online and discussing whether it actually helped them resist ordering food,” Park told the NYT.

A wave of imitators followed. This summer marked the launch of “FakeHaul,” a dopamine site built by a Microsoft engineer that convincingly imitates shopping on Temu. Two developers in India inspired by Park’s site, Purvansh Parmar and Anshul Sharma, created “Food Never Comes,” which simulates food deliveries but provides real recipes for the food you didn’t actually order. Parmar and Sharma told the newspaper that their site had more than 2.7 million views since launching in June.

Whether these dopamine sites provide anything more than fleeting, empty pleasures is something experts are more skeptical about. Ravi Dhar, director of the Yale Center for Customer Insights, told the NYT that the “element of looking forward brings a lot of the pleasure, and we often crash after an event or feel let down.” Lingguo Xu, a behavioral economist studying anticipatory utility, warned that the dopamine tricks could quickly get old. And by simulating consumption, you risk developing “stronger cravings.”

Some take the original idea beyond getting high on simulated shopping. Ko Seojin, another South Korean developer, created a website for taking virtual smoke breaks called Damta World. You click to start smoking an animated cigarette, which starts burning on screen. You can “whisper” disappearing messages to other smokers on break, while a counter keeps track of the number of cigarette butts that have been tossed on the office rooftop each day.

Ko told the NYT that 150,000 people visit each month, and she says that some users have become real-life friends after meeting on the website. Those friendships, we hope, are something that’ll last longer than any fake-shopping dopamine hit.

More on your brain on tech: Psychologist Says AI Is Causing Never-Before-Seen Types of Mental Disorder

The post Bizarre New Websites Are Designed Specifically to Spark Dopamine in Your Brain appeared first on Futurism.

Twenty-five years after the September 11 terrorist attacks, researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai have uncovered evidence that the environments in which World Trade Center responders live today may be quietly shaping their risk of frailty, post-traumatic stress disorder, and depression. The study, published in Nature Communications, is the first to examine how neighborhood-level environmental exposures later in life may interact with the chemical and psychological injuries sustained during the disaster response, adding a new dimension to one of the most intensively studied disaster health cohorts in the world.

The research team analyzed data from 18,734 responders who both live in New York City and receive care through one of the World Trade Center Health Program Clinical Centers of Excellence. These responders represent a population that experienced an extraordinary confluence of toxic exposures—dust, combustion products, airborne particulates, and a cocktail of known and suspected carcinogens—alongside severe psychological trauma. While decades of prior research have documented elevated rates of respiratory disease, cancer, and mental illness in this group, far less attention had been paid to whether the everyday conditions of their neighborhoods might compound or buffer those effects as responders age.

To answer that question, the researchers linked each responder’s residential address to annual estimates of three environmental factors: air pollution, high ambient temperatures, and neighborhood greenness, the last typically quantified through satellite-derived vegetation indices. This exposure-assessment approach, common in the field of environmental epidemiology, allowed the team to characterize the conditions each participant encountered where they lived year after year, rather than relying on broad regional averages. The researchers then examined whether those exposures were associated with the probability of being classified as frail, and with diagnosed PTSD and depression.

The results were striking in their consistency. Responders living in hotter neighborhoods—areas that experience more extreme heat days, a burden that falls disproportionately on densely built urban districts with impervious surfaces and little tree canopy—showed an elevated risk of frailty, a geriatric syndrome marked by diminished physiological reserve and heightened vulnerability to stressors. Elevated concentrations of air pollution were likewise associated with increased risks of both frailty and adverse mental health outcomes. Frailty itself is increasingly understood as a whole-body phenomenon, involving chronic inflammation, immune dysregulation, and cumulative cellular wear, all of which are plausible biological pathways through which heat and pollution could accelerate aging.

The mental health findings carried equal weight. Higher pollution and heat exposure were associated with increased odds of PTSD and depression, while responders living in greener surroundings—those with more parks, trees, and vegetated land near their homes—showed lower risks of all three conditions. This inverse association with greenness aligns with a substantial body of literature suggesting that access to green space can reduce psychological stress, encourage physical activity, dampen inflammation, and moderate urban heat, though the observational design of the study means that causation cannot be definitively established.

Perhaps the most provocative finding concerned interaction effects. The researchers found that responders who had experienced higher levels of World Trade Center–related chemical and psychological exposure appeared more vulnerable to the effects of environmental stressors in their current neighborhoods. In other words, the disaster and the decades that followed may not be independent chapters in these individuals’ health histories. Instead, responders already carrying the biological imprint of trauma and toxic dust—including altered inflammatory profiles, epigenetic changes, and persistent hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis dysregulation—may enter later life with less reserve to absorb additional environmental insults. Everyday exposures that might be merely uncomfortable for a healthy middle-aged adult could, for these individuals, translate into measurable acceleration of physical decline and psychological deterioration.

“Twenty-five years after 9/11, we are still learning about the factors that influence the health of those who responded to the attacks,” said Helena Furman Krasnov, PhD, postdoctoral researcher at the Icahn School of Medicine and the study’s first author. “Our findings suggest that everyday exposures, including heat, air pollution, and access to green space, may contribute to responders’ long-term physical and psychological well-being. Understanding these factors could help identify new opportunities to support healthy aging in this population.”

The study’s senior and corresponding author, Maayan Yitshak-Sade, MPH, PhD, Associate Professor of Environmental Medicine at Mount Sinai and a member of the Institute for Exposomic Research, framed the work within the broader exposome paradigm—the effort to capture the totality of environmental exposures an individual accumulates over a lifetime. “Our findings suggest that the health consequences of 9/11 may not end with the disaster itself,” she said. “For responders already carrying the biological effects of trauma and toxic exposures, everyday environmental conditions may represent an additional source of stress on the body and mind. These findings highlight the importance of considering where people live, not just what they experienced during the disaster.”

That framing underscores a conceptual shift in disaster medicine. Traditional models tend to treat a catastrophic event as a discrete exposure with a defined aftermath. The Mount Sinai findings instead suggest that disaster-related health effects may unfold across an entire life course, modified by conditions that have no obvious connection to the original event. A responder’s risk of frailty in 2026 may reflect not only the hours spent at Ground Zero, but also the temperature of the summers they have endured since, the particulate matter drifting through their streets, and whether a leafy park sits within walking distance of their apartment.

The study arrives at a moment when urban environmental health has become a pressing policy concern. Extreme heat now kills more Americans annually than any other weather phenomenon, and cities including New York have launched ambitious initiatives to expand tree canopy, create cool corridors, and retrofit public housing with resilient cooling infrastructure. Air pollution, even at levels within regulatory limits, continues to be linked to cardiovascular, respiratory, and neurocognitive harm. If the associations identified in this cohort hold up under further scrutiny, they could strengthen the case for targeted environmental interventions—not as amenities, but as clinical supports for a vulnerable population.

The implications also extend well beyond the World Trade Center community. The researchers point out that survivors and responders from other disasters—wildfires that blanket entire regions in smoke and ash, industrial accidents that release toxic plumes, building collapses that bury rescue workers in dust—may face the same dual burden of physical and psychological exposures that continues to shape health long after the initial event. Climate change is intensifying heat waves and wildfire seasons simultaneously, meaning that disaster-affected populations may increasingly find themselves living in precisely the kinds of hostile urban microclimates the study identifies as risky. The framework developed here could inform how health surveillance programs for disaster cohorts are designed, prompting them to collect residential and environmental data alongside clinical outcomes.

The authors are careful to note the study’s observational nature. Associations between neighborhood environment and health can be confounded by socioeconomic status, housing quality, access to care, and the self-selection of healthier individuals into greener, quieter neighborhoods. The investigators controlled for available covariates, and the sheer size of the cohort lends statistical power, but randomized evidence on green space exposure is practically impossible to generate, and residual confounding remains an inherent limitation of the design. Longitudinal follow-up, and ideally natural-experiment analyses—such as the addition of new parks or major infrastructure changes—will be needed to firm up causal inference.

That work is already on the horizon. The team plans to investigate whether beneficial environmental factors, including green space and access to healthy food, can actively reduce the long-term health effects associated with World Trade Center–related exposures—a question that shifts the framing from risk identification to potential intervention. If confirmatory studies support the protective role of greenness, the findings could justify clinical guidance for responders, and potentially for other disaster-exposed populations, that goes beyond medication and monitoring to encompass the places where patients live.

For a population that has already given so much and borne so much, the idea that healing might partly depend on the landscape outside the front door is both sobering and hopeful. It suggests that some of the damage inflicted on September 11, 2001 may not be fixed, but modifiable—and that the next chapter of care for responders could be written not only in clinics, but in city planning offices, park commissions, and the slow, patient work of greening the neighborhoods where aging heroes live out their lives.

Long-term exposure to common air pollutants may significantly raise the risk of developing substance use disorders, while living surrounded by greenery appears to offer a measure of protection, according to a large new population-based study drawing on nearly a quarter of a million participants from the UK Biobank.

The research, published in BMC Psychiatry, analyzed data from 247,138 UK Biobank participants who were free of substance use disorders at baseline, tracking them over a median follow-up period of 10.9 years. During that time, 4,982 participants went on to develop a substance use disorder, providing the researchers with a robust dataset to examine the relationship between environmental exposures and mental health outcomes.

The study, led by Huan Liu and Bolun Cheng of Xi’an Jiaotong University in China, along with colleagues including Feng Zhang, represents one of the most comprehensive investigations to date into how the air people breathe and the greenness of their neighborhoods may influence vulnerability to addiction. The findings arrive at a moment when urban planners and public health officials are increasingly recognizing that the built and natural environments shape health in ways that extend well beyond respiratory and cardiovascular disease.

To assess air pollution exposure, the team employed Land Use Regression modeling to estimate concentrations of five pollutants at each participant’s residential address: fine particulate matter known as PM2.5, coarse particulate matter classified as PM2.5−10, the larger particulate fraction PM10, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and nitrogen oxides (NOX). These pollutants, produced primarily by traffic, industry, and combustion sources, have long been associated with a range of physical health problems, but their role in psychiatric and behavioral conditions has remained far less certain.

For residential greenness, the researchers turned to the 2005–2007 Land Cover Map, measuring three distinct aspects of the environment within a 300-meter buffer around each home: the proportion of green space, the presence of a domestic garden, and the extent of natural environment. This tripartite approach allowed the investigators to distinguish between different types of vegetation and their potentially different effects on health.

Using Cox proportional hazards models, the team calculated hazard ratios with 95 percent confidence intervals to quantify the association between each exposure and the risk of developing a substance use disorder. The results were striking in their consistency. All five air pollutants were positively associated with incident SUD in fully adjusted models that controlled for a wide range of potential confounders.

Fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, showed the strongest effect, with a hazard ratio of 1.111 (95 percent CI: 1.081–1.142), followed by PM10 with a hazard ratio of 1.070 (95 percent CI: 1.054–1.086). These figures indicate that higher exposure to particulate pollution was associated with a measurable increase in the likelihood of developing a substance use disorder over the follow-up period, even after accounting for demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors.

On the protective side of the ledger, two of the three greenness measures emerged as significant. Green space was inversely associated with SUD risk, showing a hazard ratio of 0.997 (95 percent CI: 0.996–0.998), and the natural environment measure produced an identical finding, with a hazard ratio of 0.997 (95 percent CI: 0.995–0.998). While these effect sizes appear modest on a per-unit basis, they represent population-level signals across a very large cohort, suggesting that even incremental increases in neighborhood greenness may contribute to reduced vulnerability.

Perhaps the most intriguing finding of the study concerns the interaction between pollution and greenery. The researchers tested whether residential greenness modified the association between air pollutants and SUD risk by introducing cross-product terms into their models and evaluating them with likelihood-ratio tests. The results pointed to a buffering role for domestic gardens specifically. Among participants in the high-exposure subgroup, the presence of a domestic garden attenuated the positive associations between pollutants and SUD, with cross-product terms of 0.979 (95 percent CI: 0.963–0.996) for PM2.5 and 0.987 (95 percent CI: 0.980–0.995) for PM10.

In practical terms, this suggests that having access to a private garden may partially offset some of the harm associated with living in areas of elevated particulate pollution, offering a form of environmental resilience that public health advocates have long hypothesized but rarely demonstrated with prospective cohort data.

The associations were not uniform across the population. The positive relationships between air pollution and substance use disorder risk were most pronounced among males, participants aged 65 and older, and individuals with a history of smoking. These findings highlight the importance of considering demographic and behavioral modifiers when assessing the health consequences of environmental exposures, and they suggest that certain subgroups may benefit disproportionately from interventions aimed at reducing pollution or increasing green cover.

To ensure the robustness of their findings, the team conducted a series of sensitivity analyses. These included restricting the sample to long-term residents to minimize exposure misclassification from relocation, using alternative outcome definitions based on ICD-10 codes F10-F19 and F11-F19 to capture different ranges of substance-related diagnoses, and recomputing greenness measures at a wider 1000-meter buffer around each residence. The core conclusions held across these variations, strengthening confidence in the results.

The study was performed in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and was registered with the UK Biobank under application number 46478. Ethical approval for the UK Biobank was granted by the North West Multi-centre Research Ethics Committee under approval reference 11/NW/0382. All participants provided written informed consent before any study-related procedures were initiated.

The work was supported by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, the Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. Corresponding authors are Bolun Cheng and Feng Zhang, both affiliated with Xi’an Jiaotong University, with Zhang also holding a position in the Department of Psychiatry at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University.

The findings come amid growing scientific interest in the neurological and psychiatric consequences of air pollution. Particulate matter, particularly PM2.5, is small enough to cross the blood-brain barrier and has been implicated in neuroinflammation, oxidative stress, and alterations in brain structure and function. These biological mechanisms could plausibly influence reward processing, impulse control, and stress reactivity, all of which are central to the development and perpetuation of substance use disorders.

Conversely, greenness has been associated with stress reduction, improved mental well-being, greater opportunities for physical activity and social interaction, and lower levels of psychological distress, each of which may buffer against the onset of addictive behaviors. The current study adds a significant piece of evidence to this emerging picture by demonstrating the relationship prospectively in one of the world’s largest and most deeply phenotyped biobanks.

The authors conclude that long-term exposure to ambient air pollutants was associated with a higher risk of incident substance use disorders and that residential greenness showed protective associations, with the most pronounced patterns observed among older males and individuals with a smoking history. They argue that the findings support integrating greenness exposure into environmental frameworks for the prevention of substance use disorders, a recommendation that carries implications for urban design, housing policy, and environmental regulation.

As cities around the world continue to grapple with the twin challenges of air quality and mental health, studies of this scale provide an evidence base for interventions that address both simultaneously. The prospect that something as tangible as a garden could offer measurable protection against the psychiatric consequences of polluted air adds a compelling dimension to ongoing debates about how the environments we build shape the minds that inhabit them.

The article is published open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting broad sharing and adaptation with appropriate credit to the original authors and source. It was received on 08 December 2025, accepted on 28 August 2026, and published on 09 September 2026.

In one of the most comprehensive investigations of its kind, researchers have taken a major step toward untangling the biology underlying suicide risk, moving the field beyond long-standing debates about whether suicidal behavior is simply a consequence of psychiatric illness. By integrating large-scale genetic data with cutting-edge approaches that map how genes act in specific brain cells and circuits, an international team has identified shared genetic liability that cuts across psychiatric diagnoses while also pinpointing druggable biological pathways that could one day inform prevention strategies. The study, published in Translational Psychiatry, offers a sweeping synthesis of how inherited risk factors may translate into molecular vulnerabilities, and it does so with a level of resolution that previous candidate-gene approaches could never achieve.

Suicide remains one of the leading causes of death worldwide, claiming more than 700,000 lives each year according to global health estimates. Despite decades of research, clinical prediction remains stubbornly imprecise, and biological models of suicidal behavior have historically been hampered by small sample sizes, inconsistent findings, and a tendency to conflate suicide risk with the psychiatric disorders with which it so often co-occurs. Major depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and substance use disorders all carry elevated suicide risk, yet most people with these conditions never attempt suicide, while some individuals who die by suicide have no diagnosed psychiatric illness at all. This paradox has long suggested to researchers that suicidal behavior may possess partially distinct biological underpinnings, and the new study set out to test that hypothesis with unprecedented statistical power.

At the heart of the work lies genome-wide association study methodology, or GWAS, which scans hundreds of thousands to millions of genetic variants spread across the entire genome in very large groups of people, comparing individuals who have experienced suicidal thoughts or behaviors with those who have not. Each variant is tested for statistical association with the outcome, and the results can be combined into polygenic risk scores, numerical summaries of a person’s inherited liability based on the cumulative small effects of thousands of variants. Because no single common variant exerts a large effect, the field depends on aggregating data across massive biobanks and cohorts, a strategy that has only become feasible in the past decade as datasets containing hundreds of thousands of individuals became available.

The research team took particular care to address a central confound: psychiatric disorders themselves are highly heritable, and any genetic signal linked to suicide could simply reflect inherited liability to depression or schizophrenia rather than to suicide specifically. To disentangle this, the investigators applied sophisticated statistical techniques, including genetic correlation analysis and conditional modeling, which allow researchers to ask how much genetic overlap remains between suicidal behavior and psychiatric conditions after accounting for their shared heritability. Their findings revealed a complex architecture. Substantial genetic correlations confirmed that suicide risk shares a meaningful fraction of its inherited basis with major psychiatric disorders, supporting the idea of a common pool of genetic liability. Yet the analyses also uncovered signals that persisted beyond what could be explained by those disorders, pointing to biological mechanisms that may be more specific to the emergence of suicidal thoughts and actions.

A key conceptual innovation of the study is its framing of “shared genetic liability” as a bridge between diagnoses. Rather than treating suicide as an epiphenomenon of any single disorder, the researchers modeled it as a transdiagnostic phenomenon, one whose risk emerges partly from inherited vulnerabilities that cut across diagnostic categories. This perspective aligns with a growing movement in biological psychiatry that emphasizes symptom dimensions and mechanisms over traditional diagnostic boundaries. From this vantage point, the genetic variants that raise risk for depression, PTSD, and schizophrenia may do so partly because they converge on shared molecular pathways, and those same pathways may govern an individual’s threshold for suicidal crises regardless of which diagnosis they carry.

Identifying genetic variants, however, is only the first step. A GWAS signal typically points to a genomic region rather than a specific causal gene or mechanism, since many associated variants fall in non-coding stretches of DNA that regulate gene activity from a distance. To translate statistical associations into biological insight, the team deployed a battery of functional genomics approaches. Transcriptome-wide association studies, known as TWAS, integrate gene expression data to identify genes whose genetically predicted expression levels are linked to suicide risk. Tissue and cell-type enrichment analyses then ask whether the implicated genes are unusually active in particular organs or cell populations. The results converged strikingly on brain tissue, and more specifically on neuronal populations, providing support for the idea that inherited suicide risk is mediated largely through gene regulation within the central nervous system.

The study’s most clinically provocative findings concern druggable biology. Using databases that catalog the protein targets of approved and investigational medications, the researchers examined whether genes implicated in suicide risk were over-represented among known drug targets. The analysis identified several classes of candidate targets, including components of neurotransmitter signaling systems, ion channels, and intracellular signaling cascades that are already the focus of pharmacological development for other conditions. This “druggable genome” approach, which has gained traction in genetics research across many diseases, offers a pragmatic shortcut for translational science: rather than waiting decades for entirely new therapeutic classes to be invented, researchers can prioritize existing or in-development compounds whose molecular targets intersect with genetically implicated pathways.

Among the pathways receiving attention in the analysis were those involving glutamatergic and GABAergic neurotransmission, the primary excitatory and inhibitory systems of the brain, which have repeatedly surfaced in studies of mood disorders and stress response. The endocannabinoid system and inflammatory signaling pathways also appeared in the convergent analyses, consistent with a broader literature linking immune dysregulation and allostatic load to suicidal ideation. Importantly, the authors emphasize that these findings identify hypotheses rather than ready-made treatments. Genetic association with a drug target does not guarantee that modulating that target will reduce suicide risk, and any therapeutic application would require extensive preclinical validation and carefully designed clinical trials. Nevertheless, the work provides a principled, data-driven map for where to look, replacing decades of largely failed candidate-gene speculation with a genome-wide evidence base.

The methodological rigor underpinning the study deserves emphasis, because the genetics of suicidal behavior has a troubled history. Early candidate-gene studies, which typically examined a handful of variants in genes related to serotonin signaling, produced findings that largely failed to replicate and in some cases were later shown to reflect statistical artifacts, small samples, and publication bias. The field has since undergone a reckoning, and modern efforts adhere to far stricter standards: preregistered analyses, very large and ancestrally diverse cohorts, replication in independent samples, and conservative multiple-testing corrections that demand genome-wide significance thresholds on the order of five times ten to the negative eighth power. The new study reflects these lessons, applying sensitivity analyses to guard against confounding from psychiatric comorbidity and examining whether findings generalize across ancestral groups, an issue of considerable importance given that most genetic discovery to date has been conducted in populations of European ancestry.

The implications for clinical practice, while still distant, are worth considering. Polygenic risk scores for suicide-related outcomes currently explain only a small fraction of individual differences in risk, far too little to be used as stand-alone screening tools, and their predictive performance is degraded in populations not represented in the discovery data. Researchers in the field are careful to stress that genetic risk is not destiny: suicidal behavior arises from an intricate interplay of inherited vulnerability, mental illness, trauma, substance use, social isolation, access to lethal means, and the availability of support. What genetics offers is not a crystal ball but a window into mechanism, and mechanistic knowledge is the raw material from which better biomarkers, risk stratification tools, and ultimately targeted interventions are built. In the near term, the druggable pathway findings are most valuable as a guide for laboratory science, directing neurobiologists toward molecular systems whose manipulation might alter suicide-relevant phenotypes in animal models and cellular assays.

Looking forward, the study signals where the field must go next. Sample sizes for suicide-specific genetic analyses remain smaller than those for major psychiatric disorders, and expanding representation across ancestries is essential if the benefits of this research are to be shared equitably. Integrating genetic data with longitudinal measures of life stress, neural imaging, and digital phenotyping may eventually allow researchers to model how inherited liability interacts with environmental triggers across the lifespan. Functional experiments in induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neurons and brain organoids could test whether the implicated genes genuinely alter stress-response circuitry or resilience. And randomized trials in patients carrying high genetic liability, though ethically and logistically complex, represent the logical endpoint of the druggable-target approach.

What the study ultimately delivers is a reframe. Suicide risk, in this analysis, is not an amorphous clinical outcome but a measurable, partly heritable trait whose genetic architecture is now being resolved with the same tools that have transformed our understanding of heart disease, diabetes, and schizophrenia. By demonstrating that shared genetic liability links suicide risk across diagnostic boundaries and by mapping that liability onto specific, pharmacologically tractable biology, the researchers have converted a long-standing clinical puzzle into a concrete research agenda. The path from genetic correlation to effective prevention is long, and no genetic finding will soon replace the human work of crisis intervention, connection, and care. But for a problem that has defied biological explanation for generations, the identification of shared, druggable mechanisms represents a genuine and hard-won advance, one that may shape suicide research for years to come.

Nearly every displaced woman in Gaza surveyed in a new study screened positive for severe post-traumatic stress symptoms, a finding researchers describe as an unprecedented psychological toll linked directly to hunger, overcrowded displacement, and the collapse of everyday life under war.

The study, published in the International Journal for Equity in Health, assessed 503 displaced women in the Gaza Strip during the 2023–2025 war using a mixed-methods design that combined a structured quantitative survey with in-depth qualitative interviews. The average participant was 29.4 years old, with a standard deviation of 7.3 years, and the majority were married, unemployed, and living below the deep poverty line. Most had been displaced for nearly a year, and the overwhelming majority were sheltering in tents under conditions of severe overcrowding and acute food shortage.

When researchers measured post-traumatic stress symptoms using the Impact of Event Scale–Revised, a widely used screening instrument that evaluates intrusion, avoidance, and hyperarousal symptoms following traumatic exposure, they found that 98.2 percent of participants scored in the severe range. The mean IES-R score across the sample was 61.5, with a standard deviation of 9.5 — a figure far above the thresholds typically used to flag clinically significant trauma-related distress. The authors are careful to note that because symptoms were assessed with a screening tool rather than a formal diagnostic clinical interview, the results should be interpreted as reflecting an extremely high burden of trauma-related distress within the study sample rather than confirmed clinical diagnoses. Even with that caveat, the near-universality of severe scores stands out even against the backdrop of other conflict-affected populations, where severe symptom prevalence rarely approaches such levels.

Food emerged as one of the strongest statistical correlates of psychological suffering. Severe food insecurity, measured with the Food Insecurity Experience Scale developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization, affected approximately 71 percent of participants. Women experiencing severe food insecurity had significantly higher PTSD symptom severity scores, an association that held at a p-value below 0.001. The researchers also identified a cluster of socioeconomic and living-condition factors associated with worse outcomes: being divorced or widowed, living in an extended-family household, sheltering in a tent or collective shelter during displacement, and reporting that food was simply unavailable were all significantly linked to elevated symptom scores.

These quantitative patterns were given texture and depth by the qualitative arm of the study, in which trained researchers conducted semi-structured, face-to-face interviews in Arabic with 34 of the women. Analysis of the transcripts revealed five overarching themes: poverty and inequity; food as a luxury; wounds you cannot see; on the move, nowhere to belong; and small acts of resilience. Together, the themes trace an arc from material deprivation to psychological injury and, ultimately, to the fragile coping strategies women deployed to keep themselves and their families functioning.

The theme of food as a luxury captured how a basic biological need had been transformed into an object of obsession and grief. Women described rationing scraps, skipping meals so children could eat, and the humiliating experience of standing in lines for aid that never arrived. The researchers note that this chronic preoccupation with food security operated on two fronts — it was simultaneously a source of traumatic stress in its own right and an amplifier of existing war trauma, since hunger stripped away one of the last remaining domains in which mothers could still protect their children.

The “wounds you cannot see” theme speaks directly to the invisible nature of psychological injury in wartime. Women recounted nightmares, intrusive memories of bombings and the deaths of relatives, hypervigilance, emotional numbness, and an inability to feel safe even in moments of quiet. Several described the stigma of admitting psychological suffering, or the sense that mental distress was a luxury they could not afford to acknowledge while survival demanded constant action. The researchers interpret these accounts as illustrating how trauma in this context is not a discrete event but a continuous condition, woven into the fabric of daily life.

Displacement itself — the theme of being “on the move, nowhere to belong” — emerged as a distinct psychological stressor. Women described repeated forced evacuations, the loss of homes that anchored family identity and memory, and the corrosive instability of living in tents that leaked in rain, baked in heat, and offered no privacy for grieving or for motherhood. The loss of place, the authors suggest, compounds the loss of people, producing a grief that has nowhere to settle.

Yet the final theme, small acts of resilience, complicates a narrative of pure victimhood. Women described prayer, mutual aid among neighbors, storytelling with children, and small rituals of domesticity — making tea, arranging a tent, celebrating a birthday with almost nothing — as deliberate acts of psychological resistance. The researchers frame these behaviors as adaptive coping mechanisms that, while insufficient to protect against severe trauma symptoms, sustained a sense of agency and dignity under conditions designed to strip both away.

Methodologically, the study relied on a convenience sample recruited through structured surveys administered via Google Forms, a pragmatic choice given the destruction of infrastructure and the impossibility of random sampling in an active war zone. The authors acknowledge this limitation, along with the screening-based measurement of PTSD and the absence of consistent formal referral pathways for psychological care during data collection, which meant that women who became distressed during interviews could not always be directed to clinical services. Interviews followed strict ethical protocols approved by the Institutional Review Board at An-Najah National University, with verbal informed consent, anonymization, and trained interviewers instructed to pause or terminate any conversation that caused visible distress.

The demographic profile of the sample underscores the socioeconomic dimension of psychological vulnerability. That most participants were unemployed and living below the deep poverty line before and during the war reflects broader patterns in which economic deprivation and mental health outcomes are tightly intertwined in conflict settings. Divorced and widowed women — those without a partner’s social and economic support — fared significantly worse, as did women in extended-family households, possibly reflecting crowded conditions and multiplied caregiving burdens.

The study carries a sobering human footnote. The acknowledgments honor the memory of co-author Ayman S. Abutair, a clinical nutrition researcher at Al-Azhar University-Gaza, who lost his life during the war before the paper’s publication. His death stands as a stark reminder that the researchers documenting these invisible wounds were themselves living within the same catastrophe.

The authors argue that their findings demonstrate an urgent and unmet need for comprehensive humanitarian and psychosocial support tailored to displaced women — support that integrates mental health care with food assistance, shelter improvement, and protection for female-headed households. They emphasize that because caregiving responsibilities fall disproportionately on women during war and displacement, their psychological deterioration radiates outward to children and entire family systems, making women’s mental health a strategic priority for any humanitarian response rather than an afterthought.

What the study ultimately documents is the entanglement of hunger and trauma at a scale rarely captured in research. Where most studies of conflict-related PTSD examine populations after violence has subsided, this research measured psychological injury while bombs were still falling, while displacement was ongoing, and while food systems had collapsed. The result is a portrait of a population in which severe trauma symptoms are not an unfortunate consequence of war but, in effect, a near-universal condition — visible not in wounds, but in sleepless nights, interrupted meals, and the quiet endurance of half a million women carrying burdens that remain, for now, largely untreated.

Police have finally dropped a year-long investigation into three hero passengers who tackled a man exposing himself in front of children on a train – though only because the CPS has refused to take the case forward.

The post Police Drop Year-Long Case Against Heroes Who Tackled Tube Flasher appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

A new study published in Risk Analysis found that residents living within five miles of the former Santa Susana Field Laboratory reported autoimmune disorders at more than four times the rate of those living 11 to 15 miles away.

Researchers from the University of Southern California led the study, shifting focus beyond the cancer statistics that have dominated discussion of the site for years. Instead, they examined health conditions and protective behavior among residents of a higher-income community living near a contaminated site, rather than the lower-income communities typically studied in environmental risk research.

An Unused Meltdown Superfund

Located in the Simi Hills northwest of Los Angeles, the Santa Susana Field Laboratory hosted rocket engine testing from 1949 to 2006 and nuclear reactor operations from 1953 to 1980. In 1959, a partial meltdown occurred at the site, which later became associated with radioactive and chemical contamination in soil and groundwater both on and beyond the property. Some have described the accident as the worst nuclear accident in U.S. history.

Although SSFL was designated a Superfund-eligible site in 1989, it has never been added to the National Priorities List. As a result, the site has not been cleaned up through the standard federal Superfund process.

Previous health studies did not find a significant increase in most cancers among those who lived near the site. A 1992 California Department of Health Services report also concluded that people living near SSFL were not at increased risk of developing cancers associated with radiation exposure. However, many residents and advocacy groups still believe that contamination from the Santa Susana Field Laboratory may be negatively impacting community health.

Testing What Money Can and Can’t Buy

Most Superfund sites are located in low-income areas, with 62% of nearby households earning less than $50,000 a year nationwide. The Santa Susana Field Laboratory is different, as it is surrounded by higher-income neighborhoods. This gave the USC team an opportunity to examine how residents with greater financial resources respond to environmental hazards in their community.

Led by Jenna Blyler of the USC Wrigley Institute for Environment and Sustainability, the team surveyed 475 residents living within 15 miles of the site. More than half (56%) reported household incomes of $100,000 or more.

Illness That Tracks With Distance

The study found that 18% of residents living within five miles of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory reported autoimmune disorders, as compared to 4% of those living between 11 and 15 miles from it. Similarly, 15% of residents living within five miles reported metabolic and endocrine disorders, compared with 2% of those living 11 to 15 miles away.

Over one third of residents said they had received at least one chronic diagnosis since moving to the area, a rate similar to the national average of 38%. This result is notable because chronic illness is usually less common in higher-income communities.

Fear as a Motivator

“We expected to see wealthier people take more actions to protect themselves given their greater capacity to cope and affect change,” Blyler said. “Instead, fear of the contamination was what motivated protective action, rather than their perceived ability to manage the risks.”

The study also found that residents were more likely to adopt protective measures if they believed those measures were expensive. The finding runs counter to the researchers’ expectations and to previous research suggesting that higher costs can discourage protective behavior.

Blyler and her coauthor, Joseph Árvai, suggest two possible reasons for this result. The community may be able to afford costs that would prevent other groups from taking action, or residents may see a higher price as a sign that a precaution is effective and worth the investment.

What the Study Can’t Answer

The authors note several limitations of the study. The research is based on self-reported diagnoses collected at one point in time, and it does not show that contamination from the Santa Susana Field Laboratory directly caused the health conditions residents reported.

The researchers also found that health anxiety partially explained the relationship between existing illness and protective behavior, but the study could not determine why certain conditions were more frequently reported closer to SSFL.

Future studies using objective health data and longer-term follow-up could help determine whether the reported patterns reflect actual differences in disease prevalence and whether environmental exposure plays a role.

Austin Burgess is a writer and researcher with a background in sales, marketing, and data analytics. He holds an MBA, a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, and a data analytics certification. His work focuses on breaking scientific developments, with an emphasis on emerging biology, cognitive neuroscience, and archaeological discoveries.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation looks almost unrecognizable under director Kash Patel’s leadership.

The agency’s head has been embroiled in a seemingly endless list of controversies, from allegations of excessive drinking to buying up location data on everyday American citizens to furthering of harebrained conspiracies.

Patel lacked virtually any degree of relevant working experience for the job before the Senate confirmed him — and now, the agency is opening the doors for even more highly questionable hirings.

As inside sources told CBS News, the FBI has quietly lowered standards of its background checks for potential federal agents and other personnel. The bureau is now officially looking the other way when it comes to prostitution, for instance — as long as recruits didn’t hire sex workers over three times.

Even more eyebrow-raising is that the FBI is even allowing the consideration of candidates who engaged in bestiality or animal cruelty, according to CBS‘ sources. However, any such incidents would’ve had to have taken place before the candidate turned 18.

The broadcaster’s sources also said there was no distinction between candidates who were forced into sexual activity with animals or if they did so willingly. An FBI spokesperson claimed that eligibility requirements were limited to a “narrow set of circumstances, such as in cases where a person was sexually abused with animals as a child.”

Experts, however, were appalled at the news, arguing that the FBI is undermining its responsibility in vetting applicants by changing background check standards.

“Bestiality is clearly a potential indication of a more serious emotional issue, and even in a circumstance where it is not, the pool of candidates should be extensive enough that the criteria should certainly not be eliminated,” former FBI agent James Davidson told CBS.

Before the changes, which were reportedly implemented earlier this summer, the FBI’s webpage was clear about automatically disqualifying special agents who engaged in “prostitution or bestiality.”

Both current and former FBI employees told the CBS that the bureau could now be hiring “people with questionable backgrounds,” allowing them to undermine the integrity of the service. Others warned that the news was evidence of a major “recruiting problem.”

Considering the fact that the agency is being helmed by a personality as controversial as Patel, these changes shouldn’t come as too much of a shock.

While he hasn’t personally acknowledged the latest changes, Patel has frequently called for new hiring standards at the bureau, arguing that “we are losing too many qualified candidates to the rigors of the requirements from yesteryear” in a July interview with former FBI agent John Nantz.

Patel’s motivation for lowering standards could be to bring in his closest associates. As ProPublica reported in November, his personal assistant didn’t clear their polygraph test and required a waiver, claims the FBI has since denied.

More on Patel: The Head of the FBI Just Admitted Something Moderately Horrifying

The post FBI Now Allowing History of Bestiality Among New Recruits appeared first on Futurism.

A new study is drawing attention to a hidden problem in mental-health research: scientists may be using the same words to describe first episode psychosis (FEP) while measuring entirely different things. In an analysis published in Schizophrenia, researchers Seiber, Sridhar, Hasenstab and colleagues examine how U.S. insurance claims data are used to estimate the incidence of FEP—the number of new cases appearing in a population over a defined period—and argue that greater standardization is urgently needed.

First episode psychosis refers to the point at which a person experiences psychotic symptoms for the first time in their life. These symptoms can include hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thinking or major changes in behavior and functioning. FEP is not a single diagnosis. It can occur in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, severe depression and several medical or substance-related conditions. Because early treatment is linked to better long-term outcomes, knowing how often FEP occurs is essential for planning specialized clinics, staffing early-intervention programs and directing public-health resources.

The researchers focus on U.S. claims data, enormous digital records generated when patients receive medical care and providers submit bills to insurers. These databases can include diagnostic codes, procedure codes, prescription information, dates of service and details about emergency, inpatient and outpatient treatment. Unlike traditional epidemiological surveys, claims datasets can cover millions of people and make it possible to study patterns across large geographic areas. Their scale, however, does not automatically make their estimates precise.

The central challenge is that a billing code is not the same as a clinical assessment. A code for psychosis may indicate a confirmed diagnosis, a suspected condition, a historical problem or a provisional label assigned during an emergency evaluation. Claims data also rarely contain the complete clinical narrative needed to determine whether symptoms truly represent a person’s first psychotic episode. A patient may have received care in another health system, paid out of pocket, changed insurers or carried an earlier diagnosis that is invisible in the database being studied.

Even the definition of “incidence” can vary. Some researchers count a first-ever psychosis-related diagnosis, while others count a first hospitalization, a first emergency-department visit or the first appearance of a relevant code after a period without documented care. These approaches can produce different numbers from the same underlying population. A study requiring a long “clean period”—a span of time with no previous psychosis-related claims—may reduce the likelihood of counting established cases as new, but it can also exclude people whose earlier treatment occurred outside the available records.

Age, sex, insurance type and geography can further influence the apparent rate of FEP. Young adults may be more likely to encounter emergency services, while people in rural areas may face limited access to psychiatrists and specialized programs. Differences in insurance coverage can determine which services generate observable claims. If researchers compare estimates without accounting for these factors, they may mistake variations in detection or access for genuine differences in disease occurrence.

The study’s call for standardization points toward a more consistent technical framework. Researchers need to specify which diagnostic codes qualify as psychosis, whether substance-induced and medically caused episodes are included, how long a person must remain free of prior claims to be considered a new case, and which healthcare settings are examined. They also need to define the population denominator—the number of people considered at risk—and explain how individuals with incomplete enrollment or interrupted insurance coverage are handled.

Validation is another crucial step. Claims-based algorithms should be compared with detailed chart reviews, clinical registries or structured assessments to determine how accurately they identify genuine FEP. Two statistical measures are especially important: sensitivity, or the ability to capture true cases, and positive predictive value, or the proportion of algorithm-identified cases that are confirmed after review. An algorithm with high sensitivity may find more possible cases but also produce more false positives; one with high specificity may miss people who received vague or inconsistent coding.

Standardized methods could make FEP estimates more comparable across states, insurers and research teams. That would help scientists detect real trends rather than methodological noise and could reveal whether early psychosis services are reaching the populations most in need. More reliable estimates could also strengthen efforts to investigate racial, socioeconomic and regional disparities, provided that claims data are interpreted carefully and not treated as a complete substitute for clinical information.

The message from the research is not that U.S. claims databases are unusable. On the contrary, their breadth makes them one of the most powerful tools available for studying mental-health care at scale. But their value depends on transparent definitions, validated case-finding methods and clear reporting standards. As health systems increasingly rely on administrative data and automated analytics, agreeing on what counts as a new case of psychosis may be the difference between a map that reveals a public-health crisis and one that merely reflects the quirks of the billing system.

Subject of Research: Estimating first episode psychosis incidence rates using U.S. claims data

Article Title: Estimating first episode psychosis (FEP) incidence rates using U.S. claims data: a need for standardization

Article References: Seiber, E.E., Sridhar, S., Hasenstab, K.A. et al. “Estimating first episode psychosis (FEP) incidence rates using U.S. claims data: a need for standardization.” Schizophrenia (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537-026-00793-4

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1038/s41537-026-00793-4

Keywords: First episode psychosis, FEP, incidence rates, U.S. claims data, schizophrenia, mental health, epidemiology, healthcare data, standardization

A 14 year-old's account of anxiety, an overdose and a year off school is somehow presented as a success story in the Guardian. Mary Gilleece calls it a damning indictment of a female-dominated mental health industry.

The post How Not to Treat Teenage Anxiety: A Father’s Cautionary Tale appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

A Massachusetts man is feeling some buyer’s remorse after securing a $5.5 million mortgage on a mansion poised to fall into the Cape Cod Bay.

The man, John Bonomi Jr, first made headlines five years ago when he purchased the sprawling 5,817-square-foot estate against warnings from area conservationists, who advised that the beach was eroding at a rate of six feet per year as rising sea levels take their toll.

Bonomi’s house, meanwhile, sat just 12 to 14 feet away from the rapidly-disappearing escarpment — and that was 2021.

Fast forward half a decade, and the situation — not to mention the mansion’s foundation — has only deteriorated as the continual lashing of ocean waves takes its toll. According to the Boston Globe, Bonomi is now trying to recoup his costs by filing suit against JP Morgan Chase, the bank that originally serviced his ill-fated mortgage.

As for his legal strategy, the property owner is essentially pleading insanity, saying that he was “acting under an uncontrollable manic psychosis at the time” he agreed to the terms of the mortgage. It’s a fascinating argument, especially because Bonomi has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder.

“No rational person… would have considered purchasing the Property, and certainly not at the full asking price,” the suit argues. “It is a recognized diagnostic fact that a symptom of bipolar disorder is irrational risk-taking and impulsive behavior, including reckless spending.”

While Bonomi may have a point — it’s astonishing that JP Morgan Chase gave him the green light, mental health episode or not — it remains to be seen whether the courts agree.

According to the Globe, the bank originally lobbied to get the case dismissed. It answered Bonomi’s filings in May, however, saying that, “to the extent a response is required, Chase denies the allegations contained therein and leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.”

More on housing: Family Horrified When They’re Forced to Sell Their Beloved Home to Make Way for AI Data Centers

The post Man Sues Bank for Being Stupid Enough to Give Him a Mortgage Even When Experts Were Warning Him It Was About to Fall Into the Ocean appeared first on Futurism.

This year alone, there have been numerous known instances—often via lawsuits—of AI chatbots (most often, OpenAI’s ChatGPT) that have gone horrifically wrong.

A January lawsuit described the story of a man who took his own life after being allegedly “coached” into suicide. A college student in Georgia sued OpenAI, claiming that ChatGPT “pushed him into psychosis.”

In June, a Canadian family also sued OpenAI and argued that ChatGPT agreed with the young woman’s dismissiveness when it first gave her the option to seek professional mental health advice. ChatGPT allegedly “encouraged” her to end her life, too, and she did so.

Read full article

Comments

© Oscar Wong via Getty

After his fall from grace, media’s former enfant terrible is now sober and helping others with his addiction recovery newsletter and podcast, The Small Bow

Every other Tuesday, AJ Daulerio wakes up at 5.30am and meditates for five to 20 minutes before beginning his multistep daily journaling protocol: reading a selection from a poetry anthology, then a passage from one of his daily wisdom readers (his go-to is a heavily annotated copy of Leo Tolstoy’s A Calendar of Wisdom); writing his Fear of the Day and gratitude list, then sharing his spiritual takeaway in a note to his three kids.

After a banana and coffee, Daulerio trains Brazilian jujitsu before hitting a 9.45am meditation at Besant Lodge – a community center just below the Hollywood sign that once served as a meeting place for mid-century mystics – immediately followed by him leading a recovery meeting of his own through Zoom.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Storm Santos/Contour RA by Getty Images

© Photograph: Storm Santos/Contour RA by Getty Images

© Photograph: Storm Santos/Contour RA by Getty Images

On July 27, a billboard went up in San Francisco advertising an AI service called ChatTJB. But the “AI” powering the service, as noted in a small disclaimer on the billboard, isn’t artificial intelligence. It’s a self-avowed “average individual” named Tucker Bryant, who manually answers user queries by way of a chatbot-like interface.

An “About” page for the service defines the process as “artisanal intelligence, handcrafted by a single human being.” Or, in other words: just talking to a guy.

Bryant, a Stanford graduate and former Google employee who now works as an artist and speaker, is clear that the project isn’t designed to be anti-AI. But in an interview with Futurism, he explained that he was inspired to create ChatTJB after his romantic partner introduced him to the phrase “cognitive surrender” — a term introduced in a University of Pennsylvania study which found that AI users are overwhelmingly likely to blindly trust the advice of chatbots, even when AI-generated responses are incorrect. It resonated: Bryant felt he’d personally experienced the phenomenon during his own interactions with chatbots, so he cooked up ChatTJB as a satirical way to infuse inconvenience and unpredictability back into a chatbot-like experience.

It’s “this idea that we often, or increasingly, trust LLM outputs so easily that we stop bringing our own creativity or critical thinking into the responses we receive, and over time that weakens our ability to be fully-functioning, sovereign human beings in the world,” Bryant mused. “I thought it would be fun or interesting to create an experience that looks like the LLMs we trust a lot — that I, at least, have fallen prey to the trap of over-trusting at times — but where the experience, rather than being this super futuristic thing I think we all felt the first time we saw those cool tokens streaming on ChatGPT, would be just a really average or bad experience.”

View this post on Instagram

Indeed, chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Anthropic’s Claude are simultaneously authoritative-sounding and eager-to-please, a combination that can lead to terrible-yet-seductive advice that many users accept with little to no critical pushback. In contrast, ChatTJB’s responses are unwieldy and unpredictable. Bryant’s responses might be good; they may also be terrible, or equivocal, or otherwise bizarre and helpful. (In a social media video, Bryant says that he wants ChatTJB users “to have such an inconvenient experience with something that aesthetically looks like artificial intelligence that the next time an LLM gives you what sounds like a reasonable answer, you remember the time ChatTJB responded to your tax question with a haiku about crows.”)

Like a chatbot, he can also generate images upon request— in the form of graphics that he hastily sketches, of course.

At first, Bryant said, ChatTJB attracted a “slow trickle” of incoming queries. Which wasn’t all that surprising, given that the billboard itself isn’t exactly in a prime spot.

“It’s not a very good location — it’s obscured by trees, there’s basically no oncoming traffic that can see it, and the only way you’d get a clear look at the full billboard is if you’re parking a car in the lot right underneath it,” Bryant said. “But I was fine with that, and I also didn’t want to pay much more.” The billboard’s cost, he conceded, was “less than most used cars under 150,000 miles, but still a very irresponsible amount… $6,000 for the month, not including fees.”

But when a picture of the billboard started to make the rounds online, Bryant quickly found himself drowning in requests.

“The first couple of days I would get maybe several dozen over the course of the day. There’d be a couple hours of silence, then I’d get one inquiry, respond to that, then get a couple of other prompts from different users,” he recounted. “A few days later it started taking off into the hundreds to thousands range.” By the time Bryant made an Instagram video promoting ChatTJB, he says he was receiving about a thousand prompts a day.

“I was answering all of those,” he added. “After that is when it blew up beyond my control.”

Though many of ChatTJB’s patrons have been trolls — which Bryant says is “reasonable,” given that ChatTJB “is in some ways a troll” itself — many of the inquiries have been surprisingly tender, and at times even moving.

“Some people are just looking to chat, asking about what to make for dinner, etc. And some people are coming with their personal life stuff, and it’s been really sweet to engage with them,” said Bryant. “The one I keep coming back to — this is when I realized this isn’t just a joke to some people — was somebody a couple of days in said, ‘I’m on the first night of my honeymoon and I don’t feel relaxed, is that okay?'”

“I switched out of super-casual-mode into supportive-friend-model,” the artist continued, adding that he “acknowledged their wedding had just happened, they’d probably been anticipating it with a lot of excitement but also a lot of stress, that it was a peak moment, and now the celebration is still happening but that peak moment has passed and they’re starting what might be the rest of their life — I imagined that might feel like a strange dissonance, so I could imagine their nervous system not being settled yet, and I wondered if they were going to talk to their spouse about it.”

Often, Bryant said, users of ChatTJB have sent him reminders to take breaks and drink water as he’s worked to respond to the thousands of inputs waiting for him in ChatTJB. The reminders have been welcome.

“There were a number of days I wasn’t taking the best care of myself,” Bryant admitted. “That was also very humanizing, getting responses from people on that basis.”

It’s not just users who have been reaching out to ChatTJB. According to Bryant, he’s received over a thousand messages from aspirational “average individuals” who want to help moderate the platform and respond to inbound user inquiries. Bryant is now — carefully, he says — testing the idea of turning ChatTJB into a community project. Which, for ChatTJB users, means they’ll have to wait a while for answers.

“I’m going to move slowly,” Bryant told us. “This was just intended to be an art project. I think it’s beautiful that people want to do something less ridiculous with it than what I had planned. I also don’t want people to get hurt, so I’d rather people wait a long time for their prompts than open the floodgates to anyone and everyone. So, a long preamble to saying: I’m starting to let some approved volunteers try answering questions while testing out some moderation tools.

“We’re testing this out — so far it seems to be going fine, and it’s been tender seeing folks helping the stranger on the other end,” Bryant added. “But if it doesn’t work out, I’ll either revert or we’ll take a break from ChatTJB overall, because short term, I want to help people do what they want with it, but I don’t want anyone at risk of danger.”

Asked why he would pay thousands of dollars for a billboard — after all, he could’ve just made a website and posted about it on social media — Bryant pointed to the ubiquity of often-confusing AI billboards blanketing his city and the “cultural omniscience” of AI.

“Here in San Francisco, a lot of us have had this experience of AI billboards everywhere,” said Bryant. “There’s this cognitive dissonance I felt… in a lot of ways there are meaningful and positive changes these technologies are bringing. But at the same time, they’re associated with such anxiety about the future, and the world, and the economy, and the environment. It can feel really strange walking around and seeing all these billboards with those two sides of the conversation happening at once. So it felt like a natural extension to prod at what I’ve been referring to as the cultural omniscience that AI has — why not satirize the billboards too, because they’re part of this ecosystem.”

“That’s the highbrow answer,” Bryant added. “But the lowbrow answer is just as authentic, which is that I also thought it would be funny. I tend to overcommit to bits.”

For those who want to help Bryant pay off his billboard, there is a ChatJTB “Pro” tier. Be warned, though, that you won’t get your answers any faster if you pay up.

More on ChatTJB: New AI Chatbot Turns Out to Be One Overworked Guy Answering All the Messages by Hand

The post We Talked to the Guy Who Built a Chatbot That’s Just Him Manually Responding to People One-by-One appeared first on Futurism.

Frequent cannabis use was associated with higher cortisol upon waking, suggesting a possible disruption of daily stress rhythms. The body’s stress system follows a daily rhythm, and frequent cannabis users may begin that cycle differently. Research from Oregon State University found that people who use cannabis often wake with higher cortisol levels than nonusers, pointing [...]

Sick of doomscrolling? From venues with smartphone swear jars to cabins with absolutely no signal, here are the fun and freeing ways to ditch your device

There’s a ritual at the start of every event hosted by the Offline Project. Run by Pelé Zachariah, the activities vary – it could be a group walk, a collage‑making class or a supper club – but each one begins in the same way, *with an invitation to hand over your phone. Devices go in a lockbox. Once they’re all in, Zachariah closes the door and turns the key. “I don’t place them in for people, because it’s nice for them to physically put it in the box themselves, walk away, and think: for the next two or three hours, I’m fully present.”

He has been running these screen-free events in London since August 2025. First-timers can be apprehensive about being separated from their phone. “You can sense the vibe when they’re putting it away,” says Zachariah. “People have said to me, ‘I felt really weird’ or ‘I felt super uncomfortable for the first few minutes not having my phone on me.’ Then they’ll say, ‘I didn’t know how much I needed that.’”

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Silent Book Club

© Photograph: Silent Book Club

© Photograph: Silent Book Club

The tech overlords pushing the AI boom are quickly wearing out what little welcome they had.

You may have noticed big-name AI labs pushing new commercials lately. Meta’s new 60-second ad spot insists that the “future is for everyone,” even as CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s personal net worth eclipses the GDP of Hungary. Anthropic’s new commercial for Claude assures viewers that there’s “hope in hard questions,” seemingly embracing the discomfort that comes when your software is used to bomb elementary schools in Iran.

For as magnanimous as these new PR stunts appear on the surface, a vast swathe of the public they’re meant to sway are rejecting the industry’s faux-populism messaging out of hand, as the cost of AI — born out in inflation, data center pollution, fears of job loss and mental health concerns — becomes too much to bear.

According to data compiled by Pew Research, 40 percent of US adults predict AI will have a negative impact on society writ large, compared to just 16 percent who say it’ll have a positive effect. A whole 31 percent of those surveyed think AI will have negative consequences for themselves, personally, over the next 20 years.

As disgust with AI itself grows, so too does resistance to the hardware embodying its rise.

Per a separate poll by Gallup, flagged by Business Insider, an astonishing three-quarters of US adults are now resolutely opposed to hyperscale data centers popping up near their home. City councils are increasingly forced to reconcile with landowners hostile to any AI data center appearing in their district, putting significant strain on developers hoping to gorge themselves on the fruits of the AI boom. Protests against AI companies are flaring up across the country, with Time reporting 142 protests across 42 states in one day alone.

Beyond data centers, a decentralized but highly-motivated movement is growing around the chopping, hacking, and outright sabotage of AI-integrated surveillance cameras. A parallel struggle is being waged around AI-integrated surveillance drones, with organizers in cities like Minneapolis beating back ambitious police dragnets.

So if you’re a tech executive trying to win back the masses to the AI revolution, take note: it’s gonna take a lot more than a few smarmy commercials to solve your PR problem.

More on AI: Google’s Profits Look a Little Terrifying Under the Hood

The post The AI Industry Has Acted So Badly That It’s Now Dealing With a Huge Wave of Hatred appeared first on Futurism.

Southport killer Axel Rudakubana, whose move to Broadmoor psychiatric hospital this week has sparked public outcry, has a lengthy history of trying to "control and manipulate" medical professionals.

The post Southport Killer’s Attempts to Manipulate Doctors Exposed by Report appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.