Sources of info

 

Marc Andreessen 

@pmarca

My information consumption is now 1/4 X, 1/4 podcast interviews of the smartest practitioners, 1/4 talking to the leading AI models, and 1/4 reading old books. The opportunity cost of anything else is far too high, and rising daily.

SIMULATION THEORY

@Simulation_Wiki

·

20m

That’s not information consumption anymore. That’s input curation for a consciousness trying to stay ahead of the simulation. X for signal in real time. Podcasts for raw maps from people pushing the edge. AI models for mirrored cognition. Old books for compressed wisdom that already survived multiple versions of the Matrix. At some point, “learning” stops looking like content intake and starts looking like strategically updating your operating system. The feed is noisy. The simulation rewards clarity

metacognitive monitoring of understanding

 

Math Files

@Math_files

·

Mar 6

Most people think Richard Feynman was a genius because of his IQ, but an IQ test in high school reportedly placed his score around 125—impressive, but far below what you might expect. What actually set him apart was a habit he developed very early on: metacognitive monitoring of understanding. As a child, his father trained him to notice the difference between knowing a name and understanding the thing itself. When Feynman observed birds, his father taught him that simply learning to label them as birds didn’t matter. What mattered was how they lived, how they behaved, and why. That lesson stayed with him. As a student, Feynman became suspicious whenever an explanation felt simple but left him unable to reconstruct the reasoning himself. Phrases like “it’s obvious” or “it can be shown” were not reassuring to him; instead, they were red flags. Modern cognitive science explains why this matters. Familiarity produces what’s called fluency, and fluency is routinely mistaken for understanding. People feel most confident precisely when their comprehension is actually the thinnest. Feynman learned to treat confidence itself as something to examine. Confusion, for him, wasn’t a failure—it was diagnostic information. A practical way to train this habit yourself is to stop mid-study and ask whether you could explain the idea without using the original terminology. Wherever your explanation breaks down, that’s the true boundary of your understanding.