Psilocybin Might Make Your Brain Live in the Moment
Psychedelics are often associated with disconnecting from reality, but a recent neuroimaging study found that psilocybin can actually make our brain activity more connected to the world around us.
找到 93 篇相关文章
Psychedelics are often associated with disconnecting from reality, but a recent neuroimaging study found that psilocybin can actually make our brain activity more connected to the world around us.
Alle paar Jahre verkündet jemand, dass die IT-Jobs verschwinden. Die Cloud ersetzt die Administratoren. Die Automatisierung ersetzt die Operatoren. Jetzt ersetzt die KI, was übrig ist. Und alle paar Jahre verschwinden die Jobs nicht, sie wandern. Sie wandern den Stack hinauf. Als physische Server der Cloud wichen, brauchten wir keine Infrastruktur-Leute weniger, wir brauchten Menschen, die Infrastruktur auf einer höheren Ebene verstehen, die Systeme entwerfen, absichern und kostenbewusst betreiben, statt Hardware in Racks zu schrauben. Als manuelle Deployments der Automatisierung wichen, brauchten wir Menschen, die die Automatisierung selbst bauen konnten. Jede Welle entfernte nicht die Arbeit. Sie hob den Boden und verschob den wertvollen Teil nach oben. Die KI ist die nächste Welle, und ich erwarte, dass sie sich genauso verhält. Sie wird viel Routine aufsaugen: das Skripten, die ersten Config-Entwürfe, die Standard-Fehlersuche. Was sie nicht aufsaugt, ist Urteilsvermögen: zu wissen, was zu bauen ist, zu entscheiden, was das Risiko wert ist, zu verstehen, wie die Teile einer echten Organisation zusammenpassen, und geradezustehen, wenn etwas schiefgeht. Wer in jedem Übergang strauchelt, sind die, die sich über die Aufgabe definieren, die automatisiert wurde. Wer gedeiht, definiert sich über das Problem, das er löst, und lässt die Werkzeuge dafür sich darunter ändern. Verteidige also nicht das eine, das du heute tust. Werde gut in der Schicht darüber. Der IT-Job hat jedes Werkzeug überlebt, das ihn beenden sollte, indem er den Stack hinaufwanderte. Diesen wird er genauso überleben. – Serguey Shinder
The next version of the European accessibility standard is scheduled for citation on 30 November 2026. EN 301 549 V4.1.1 swaps WCAG 2.1 for WCAG 2.2, and six new success criteria arrive at levels A and AA. There is a small industry of readiness checklists for it already. So I measured what the current version looks like first. The answer is that the deadline people are preparing for is not the one they have missed. I scanned the most-visited websites on EU country domains and counted which clauses of EN 301 549 they fail today, under the version cited right now. Not the one arriving. The one in force since before the European Accessibility Act deadline passed in June 2025. Sixty-four per cent fail clause 9.4.1.2, Name, Role, Value. It is Level A, the lowest bar the standard has, and it has been in every version of WCAG since 2008. Here is the full picture, and then the reasons to distrust parts of it. What was measured Clause Criterion Level Sites failing 9.4.1.2 Name, Role, Value A 96 of 149 (64%) 9.1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) AA 66 of 149 (44%) 9.2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) A 53 of 149 (36%) 9.2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) AA 51 of 149 (34%) 9.1.1.1 Non-text Content A 35 of 149 (23%) 9.1.3.1 Info and Relationships A 27 of 149 (18%) Target size is the odd one out: it is a WCAG 2.2 criterion and not currently required. It is in the table because it is the only one of the six arriving in V4.1.1 that the rule engine used here has a check for, which is a point I will come back to. Thirty-two sites of the 149, about one in five, failed nothing that automated testing can detect. That is not the same as passing. Two of those rows are not independent. The rule that most often breaks Name, Role, Value is a link with no accessible name, and the same defect also fails Link Purpose. One missing label lands in two rows of that table. I am pointing this out because a table of six numbers implies six problems, and some of them are the same problem counted twice under different cla
Vibe-coding darling Lovable just raised $400 million at a $13.3 billion valuation, roughly doubling its worth in eight months. But Lovable isn’t the only Stockholm startup putting up huge numbers lately — legal AI company Legora and health tech startup Neko Health are right there with it. On this episode of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast, Dominic-Madori Davis is joined by Sophia Bendz, a partner at Cherry Ventures and longtime fixture of Europe’s startup […]
A solid observability setup usually comes down to three pieces working together: something that collects metrics, something that exposes system-level metrics, and something that visualizes it all. Here's what each one does and how to install them. The Theory: How This All Fits Together Before installing anything, it helps to understand the model, because it's a bit different from how logging or alerting tools usually work. Pull, not push. Most people's first instinct is "the app should send its metrics somewhere." Prometheus flips that around — it pulls metrics on a timer instead. Every target (a machine, a service, an app) exposes a simple HTTP endpoint, usually /metrics , that just returns plain text numbers. Prometheus visits that endpoint every N seconds (the "scrape interval") and saves whatever it finds, with a timestamp attached. Nothing gets pushed to Prometheus — Prometheus goes and asks. This means for anything to show up in Prometheus, it has to satisfy one requirement: something has to expose a /metrics endpoint Prometheus can reach. That's the whole game. Everything else in this stack exists to satisfy that one requirement or to make the data useful afterward. Why Node Exporter exists. Your operating system doesn't naturally speak Prometheus's language — it doesn't expose CPU/memory/disk stats as a /metrics endpoint by default. Node Exporter's only job is to read stats the OS already tracks (via /proc and /sys on Linux) and republish them in the text format Prometheus expects, on port 9100. It's a translator, not a monitoring tool by itself — it collects nothing, decides nothing, alerts on nothing. It just answers "what does this machine look like right now?" whenever asked. Why Prometheus itself is separate. Prometheus doesn't know anything about CPUs or memory — it has no idea what it's scraping. It just knows: "go hit this list of URLs on a schedule, and remember what comes back." The intelligence is in the config (which targets to scrape, how often)
Overview The box ships a mostly-stock WordPress 7.0.0 install on PHP 8.2 / Apache, running on a Debian Trixie base image, packaged as a Docker/Kubernetes challenge deployment. Initial access comes through a deliberately vulnerable plugin ( wp2shell ) that hands over a www-data shell. Privilege escalation is the real puzzle: the box is hardened against the usual container-escape and SUID tricks, and the intended path is a real, recent CVE in sudo itself. Recon The challenge source was distributed as a zip ( boot2root_wordpressed-to-root.zip ) containing the Docker build context: . ├── docker │ ├── entrypoint.sh │ ├── install.php │ └── seed.php ├── docker-compose.yml ├── Dockerfile └── theme └── brunnerne-docs ├── footer.php ├── functions.php ├── header.php ├── index.php └── style.css Dockerfile pins the interesting versions: FROM wordpress:7.0.0-php8.2-apache@sha256:0b6e5bf0ed2518696a34ba3812370743b0ad3e2676882967ff5c712e51425c03 AS wordpress-source FROM debian:trixie-20240408-slim@sha256:70955dce615f114142818e95339f6ae9b461cf424d79d59ca2b04ec725d4dbc8 ... apache2 ca-certificates curl gcc libc6-dev libapache2-mod-php8.2 \ php8.2 php8.2-curl php8.2-gd php8.2-mbstring php8.2-mysql php8.2-xml php8.2-zip sudo Two details stand out immediately: gcc and libc6-dev are installed in the runtime image, not just a build stage. That is a strong hint that compiling a local privilege-escalation PoC on-box is part of the intended path. sudo is installed, which combined with the previous point points straight at a sudo local-root bug rather than a container escape. docker-compose.yml also leaks the DB credentials up front (default WordPress dev creds - not the actual privesc path, but useful context): MARIADB_DATABASE : wordpress MARIADB_USER : wordpress MARIADB_PASSWORD : wordpress MARIADB_ROOT_PASSWORD : rootpassword docker/entrypoint.sh is the key file for understanding the box's behavior at runtime. On first boot it generates a random WordPress admin account and exports the cred
Hibernation cuts down on synapses, but mice seem to retain memories anyway.
I've been digging into multisig configurations for bridge and protocol security reviews. The threshold gets all the attention — 3-of-5, 4-of-7, whatever. But after checking a few dozen Safes on mainnet, the threshold is rarely the weakest link. There are five other things that determine whether a Gnosis Safe actually protects funds, and most people only check the first one. This post walks through all of them, with cast commands you can run yourself. What the threshold does The threshold sets the minimum number of owner signatures required to execute a transaction through execTransaction() . If threshold is 3 and you have 2 signatures, the call reverts. Simple. # check threshold and owners cast call <SAFE> "getThreshold()(uint256)" cast call <SAFE> "getOwners()(address[])" This is the part everyone understlse. What the threshold does NOT protect 1. Modules This is the biggest blind spot in multisig security. Safe modules are contracts authorFromModule()`. A module can execute*any transaction from the safe without a single owner signature*. The threshold is irrelevant. The module has its own authority. `bash if this returns anything other than an empty array, investigate cast call "getModulesPagin[],address)" \ 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000001 10 ` Modules are legitimate — timelockation. But a malicious or compromisedmodule is a full bypass of every threshold. Your 7-of-10 means nothing if a module can move funds independently. 2. Guard A guard contract implements checerExecution() . It adds validation on top of the threshold — restricting destinations, limiting values, blocking certain operations. The guard address lives at a specific storage slot. If it's 0x00 , there's no guard. No additional checks beyond threshold + signatu `bash guard storage slot (keccak256("guard_manager.guard.address")) cast storage \ 0x4a204f620c8c5ccdca3fd54d003badd85ba500436a431f0cbda4f558c93c34c8 0x000...000 = no guard installe ` A guard can enforce things like "no transfers ab
Romania blew up drone boat to protect lives of several hundred rig workers.
"We will put the booster back into service for another flight as soon as possible."
As of August 2, 2026, the EU AI Act Article 50 requires AI systems to mark synthetic outputs in a machine-detectable manner. Major vendors are implementing statistical watermarking methods, which influence natural language generation without affecting performance. This has prompted a swift reaction from the open-source community, raising compliance and vulnerability concerns. By Olimpiu Pop
Observatories have been built in mines, deep under the Antarctic ice sheet, and elsewhere in an effort to detect the fleeting particles.
It turns out that the economics of rocket reuse are pretty, pretty good.
One woman’s meth addiction was so bad, the only option left might have been brain surgery. Then a single session of noninvasive, focused ultrasound seemed to do what years of treatment could not.
What Is a Message Queue? A message queue is a buffer that stores messages between producers and consumers. Producers send data to the queue, and consumers read from it. The queue decouples the two sides so they don't need to know about each other. This is a core pattern in distributed systems. Think of it like a restaurant ordering system. You (the producer) write your order on a ticket and put it on a spindle. The kitchen (the consumer) picks tickets off the spindle when they're ready. You don't shout at the chef, and the chef doesn't wait for you. The spindle is the queue. Why Use a Message Queue? Three big reasons: Decoupling : Producers and consumers evolve independently. You can change one without touching the other. Buffering : Producers can run faster than consumers. The queue absorbs spikes and prevents overload. Scaling : You can add more consumers to handle more load, or more producers to generate more work. Core Concepts Producer : Sends messages. Consumer : Receives messages. Queue : Stores messages until consumed. Broker : The server that hosts the queue (e.g., RabbitMQ, Kafka, Redis). Acknowledgment : When a consumer tells the broker it successfully processed a message. Dead Letter Queue : Where messages go if they can't be processed after retries. Simple Example with Redis Redis has a simple list-based queue using LPUSH and BRPOP . Here's a minimal Python example using redis-py . import redis import time r = redis . Redis ( host = ' localhost ' , port = 6379 ) # Producer r . lpush ( ' tasks ' , ' send_email ' ) r . lpush ( ' tasks ' , ' generate_report ' ) # Consumer (blocking pop) while True : task = r . brpop ( ' tasks ' , timeout = 5 ) if task : print ( f " Processing: { task [ 1 ]. decode () } " ) time . sleep ( 1 ) # simulate work else : break This is a simple FIFO queue. It works for basic cases but lacks features like acknowledgments, retries, and routing. Real-World Example with RabbitMQ RabbitMQ is a full-featured broker. Here's a producer an
Welcome to our weekly digest, where we unpack the latest in account and chain abstraction and the broader infrastructure shaping Ethereum. This week: MetaMask launches a self-custodial wallet built for AI agents; Ethereum core devs send Glamsterdam to a public testnet while Frame Transactions pick up client support for Hegota; a new quantum attack on lattice-based cryptography draws quick skepticism; and NEAR Intents grows into a single cross-chain liquidity layer. MetaMask Launches Its Agent Wallet Glamsterdam Testnet Goes Public as Hegota Advances A Lattice-Crypto Attack Draws Doubt NEAR Intents Becomes a Unified Liquidity Layer Please fasten your belts! MetaMask Launches Its Agent Wallet MetaMask launched its Agent Wallet , a self-custodial wallet built for AI agents to execute onchain actions inside rules the user sets. It lets traders and builders connect an agent framework, then define spend limits, allowlisted protocols, and a risk profile before the agent acts. The pitch is that safety is the product. Agent Wallet is not blind delegation, so supported transactions pass through MetaMask’s security pipeline, including transaction simulation, Blockaid-powered threat scanning, and MEV protection, and anything outside policy pauses for two-factor approval. Users pick between two modes. Guard Mode, the default, enforces daily spend limits, allowlists, and human approval for out-of-policy actions, while opt-in Beast Mode reduces approval interruptions but still runs security checks and still stops flagged transactions. On capabilities, agents can connect frameworks like Claude Code, Codex, and Cursor and execute across HyperLiquid and EVM chains such as Robinhood and Monad. They can run ERC-7821 batch swaps, and they never need a chain’s native gas token, since MetaMask settles the fee in the token being moved. This is account abstraction in a very practical form. Spend limits, allowlists, gasless execution, and batching are exactly the programmable account feature
Silicon Valley companies are already working on neurotechnology products that track your brain activity. The next privacy frontier might be the things you only think.
Finding grants means digging through 50 scattered Discords, blogs, websites, and Notion pages. So I built a fix. Meet Web3 Accelerator GrantHub (W3AGH). What is GrantHub? GrantHub is a web app that helps Web3 founders discover funding opportunities without digging through dozens of scattered websites. Grants are listed across ecosystems like Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, BNB Chain, Arbitrum, Base, and more. The idea is simple: instead of spending hours searching for funding opportunities, you should be able to find relevant grants in one place. GrantHub also has AI tools that sit on top of the grant database. You can describe your project once and instantly see which grants fit best. Why GrantHub? Funding is the lifeblood of Web3 startups, but finding grants today is painful. Scattered listings Every ecosystem publishes its own programs on its own website, blog, Discord, or other channels. There is no single source of truth. Stale information Grants expire, close, or change their requirements, while the listings founders rely on can remain outdated. Manual matching A founder has to read through each grant's requirements and figure out whether their project qualifies. With dozens of grants available, that can quickly turn into hours of work. No personal workflow There is no single place to save interesting grants, track applications, or ask questions about a specific program. GrantHub is built around solving these problems. It combines three things: One central catalog of grants stored in a real database. Personal tools: accounts, favorites, and a personal dashboard. AI assistance: a grant ranking engine, an AI assistant, a smart-contract auditor, and context-aware chat on every grant page. Who is this for? Solo builders and startups: looking for funding or ecosystem support. Beginners who don't yet know which ecosystems and grants are right for them. Anyone who would rather spend their time building than hunting for funding. The goal isn't to create another directory o
The framing that causes the most damage is treating this as a financing decision. It is not. Taking venture money is choosing a category of business: one that must attempt to become very large very quickly, and produce an exit that returns a fund. Everything else follows from that. What venture capital actually requires A venture fund needs a small number of investments to return the entire fund. That structure means a company growing steadily and profitably at twenty percent a year is a failure in a venture portfolio, even though it is an excellent business by any other measure. Once you take the money, that expectation becomes your operating constraint. Decisions that would be obviously correct for a durable business, such as slowing hiring to protect margin, become hard to defend. Questions that actually decide it Can this business plausibly become very large? Not "could it grow", but could it realistically reach a scale where a meaningful ownership stake is worth a large multiple of the money invested. Most good businesses cannot, and that is not a criticism of them. Does speed determine who wins here? In some markets the first company to reach scale takes most of the value, usually where network effects or heavy switching costs exist. In those markets, refusing capital while a competitor takes it is a decision to lose. In most markets this dynamic does not apply, and speed bought with dilution buys nothing durable. Do you want to run this for a decade and then sell it? Venture capital has an implicit ending. The fund needs liquidity. If you want to own a profitable business indefinitely, you want a fundamentally different structure and should say so before, not after. Is capital genuinely your constraint? Founders often raise to solve problems money does not solve. If you have not found product market fit, capital lets you be wrong more expensively and for longer. If distribution is unproven, funding scales an unproven motion. The honest tradeoff Venture backed
This follows many drone incursions into Romania and a failed attack in Germany.