-
Archives
- June 2026
- May 2026
- April 2026
- March 2026
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- March 2015
- January 2015
-
Meta
Axios: Bibi’s bitter pill
| Bibi’s bitter pill |
![]() |
| Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Trump. Photo illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios. Photos: Getty Images |
| On Thursday evening, President Trump called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with news he did not want to hear: He expected to sign a deal with Iran within days. “This is the deal. It’s a great deal, and it’s time to end this war,” Trump told Netanyahu, according to a senior U.S. official. Why it matters: When Netanyahu went to war alongside Trump, this is not how he envisioned it ending, Axios’ Barak Ravid writes. Flashback: Netanyahu made clear from the beginning that he believed the war could spur regime change in Tehran.Now, four months out from an election, Netanyahu’s rivals are accusing him of making Israel a “vassal state” by simply accepting Trump’s terms for peace. Keep reading. |
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Axios: U.S. blocks top Anthropic models
| U.S. blocks top Anthropic models |
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei is interviewed on “The Circuit with Emily Chang” at Anthropic headquarters in San Francisco in April. Photo: Jason Henry/Bloomberg via Getty ImagesWhen you use Claude this morning, it tells you: “Claude Fable 5 is currently unavailable.” Here’s the backstory, as scooped last night by Axios’ Alex Isenstadt and Maria Curi: The Trump administration is blocking foreign governments, companies and individuals from accessing Anthropic’s most advanced AI models. The company promptly took the model down for everyone, just two days after releasing it with great fanfare. Why it matters: The move marks an escalation in Washington’s effort to treat cutting-edge AI systems as national security assets. Anthropic is on a Pentagon blacklist deeming it too dangerous for the government’s own use, and in a Commerce Department licensing regime calling it too dangerous for foreign use. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick sent a letter to Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei yesterday saying that the Mythos 5 and Fable 5 models would be subject to export controls to any location outside of the U.S. and to all foreign persons within the country. An administration official told Axios the Commerce Department decided to take the action after another company claimed it was able to jailbreak Mythos, alarming the administration about possible national security risks. The administration tried to get Anthropic to pause releasing the latest models but was unsuccessful, the official said, prompting the export control letter.The model needs to remain locked down until the U.S. government’s national security apparatus is hardened, the official said, adding that could happen in the next few weeks. Keep reading. |
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Neuroscience News: Concussions Convert Brain Stabilizers Into Disruptive Forces. Quote: “When structural matrix inhibition drops, brain networks lose communication precision. Instead of conveying meaningful signals required for cognitive function, the circuits generate massive, chaotic electrical noise that directly prevents learning, memory formation, and accurate recall.” Comment: 30+ years since TBI but I include this quotation because people are becoming more violent and pay little attention to the impact of traumatic brain injury. “Dr. Subramanian emphasizes that these findings carry immediate societal relevance given the global surge in young people riding electric scooters or bicycles without helmets. The data proves that even mild, sub-clinical concussions internally trigger a progressive structural cascade capable of causing lifelong neurological deficits if left un-intercepted.”
Concussions Convert Brain Stabilizers Into Disruptive Forces
·June 12, 2026
Summary: Researchers deciphered the molecular chain reaction that converts the brain’s internal immune defenses into a destructive force following a concussion.
Utilizing both rat and mouse models of mild-to-moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI), the research team isolated a novel, highly specific pathobiological cascade: the TLR4-MMP-9 axis. Following impact, toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) inside neurons triggers an immediate, upstream activation of the enzyme MMP-9. This structural enzyme rapidly breaks down the brain’s supportive extracellular matrix scaffolding, dropping network inhibition and causing excessive, un-coordinated neural noise.
Crucially, the trial unmasked a fascinating biological paradox. While this pathway drives long-term network hyperexcitability, memory loss, and seizures post-injury, TLR4 acts as an indispensable homeostatic stabilizer in healthy brains, meaning clinical therapies must strictly target this pathway during a narrow, post-concussive window.
Key Facts
- The TLR4-MMP-9 Trajectory: Head trauma quickly up-regulates the innate immune receptor TLR4 inside neurons. This activation triggers an immediate, downstream explosion of the enzyme MMP-9, establishing the crucial molecular link between early immune signaling and progressive brain damage.
- Shattering the Extracellular Scaffold: In normal physiological states, baseline MMP-9 activity performs controlled remodeling of neuronal connections and the surrounding extracellular matrix. Post-TBI, hyperactive MMP-9 destabilizes the structural scaffold, eroding the delicate balance between excitatory and inhibitory signals.
- The Noise Interference Loop: When structural matrix inhibition drops, brain networks lose communication precision. Instead of conveying meaningful signals required for cognitive function, the circuits generate massive, chaotic electrical noise that directly prevents learning, memory formation, and accurate recall.
- Pharmacological and Genetic Validation: To prove absolute upstream causality, investigators blocked TLR4 using targeted pharmacology in rats and genetic knockouts in mice. In both scenarios, suppressing TLR4 completely halted the post-injury spike in MMP-9, proving that the immune receptor dictates the downstream enzymatic surge.
- The Post-Injury Intervention Window: Animals subjected to TBI displayed highly restricted synaptic plasticity and severe spatial memory failures during behavioral tracking conducted one month later. Strikingly, administering TLR4 or MMP-9 inhibitors within an early 48-hour post-injury window completely rescued long-term learning performance.
- The Homeostatic Dual-Role Paradox: In an extraordinary twist, researchers discovered that TLR4 operates within a narrow Goldilocks zone. In uninjured brains, blocking TLR4 actually causes memory failure and hyperexcitability, proving the receptor shifts from a vital homeostatic stabilizer into an abnormal, disruptive force exclusively following an impact.
- The Micro-Mobility Mandate: Dr. Subramanian emphasizes that these findings carry immediate societal relevance given the global surge in young people riding electric scooters or bicycles without helmets. The data proves that even mild, sub-clinical concussions internally trigger a progressive structural cascade capable of causing lifelong neurological deficits if left un-intercepted. https://8ee9ec7af0c3b027214d86e45b32f807.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.html
Source: UCR
Traumatic brain injuries (TBI) — even mild concussions — may trigger a chain reaction in the brain that disrupts neuronal communication, long-term memory, and cognition, according to University of California, Riverside research investigating how the brain’s immune system responds after injury.
The study, published in the Journal of Neuroinflammation, identifies a novel interaction between an innate immune receptor in the brain called toll-like receptor 4, or TLR4, and an enzyme called MMP-9 after brain injury. In normal conditions, MMP-9 activity plays an important role in remodeling neuronal connections and the brain’s extracellular matrix, the structural scaffold surrounding neurons.

Deepak Subramanian, an assistant professional researcher in the Department of Molecular, Cell and Systems Biology and the study’s corresponding author said the findings show that TLR4 activation after a concussive brain injury enhances MMP-9 activity downstream.
“Brain injury activates TLR4 in neurons,” he said. “TLR4 signaling causes MMP-9 levels to increase. Increased MMP-9 alters how neurons talk to each other, resulting in heightened network excitability associated with seizures and impaired cognition. This direct connection between neuronal TLR4 and MMP-9 in the injured brain is the crucial link.”
The research used both rat and mouse models of mild-to-moderate concussive brain injury. The scientists observed that levels of both TLR4 and MMP-9 were upregulated rapidly after injury. But when researchers blocked TLR4 signaling — either pharmacologically in rats or genetically in mice — MMP-9 levels remained unchanged.
“That told us TLR4 is upstream of MMP-9,” Subramanian said. “By recruiting an enzyme that destabilizes neuronal communication, the immune receptor is driving the changes in neuronal activity patterns. This is important because it has been a puzzle to understand how the immune signaling can alter neuronal function; our finding directly addresses this question.”
The team also found that blocking either TLR4 signaling or MMP-9 activity limited changes in brain circuits disrupted after injury. Normally, healthy brain function depends on a precise balance between excitatory and inhibitory signaling. After trauma, that balance can break down, creating unstable and overly excitable networks.
“When inhibition drops or excitation becomes excessive, the network activity patterns lose precision,” Subramanian said. “Instead of meaningful communication, you get excessive noise across the network, which interferes with learning, memory formation, and recall.”
The researchers found the animals with TBI showed reduced synaptic plasticity — the brain’s ability to strengthen or reorganize neural connections during learning. Consequently, injured animals showed deficits in spatial memory in behavioral tests conducted one month later. To the researchers’ surprise, animals treated with TLR4 or MMP-9 inhibitors early after brain injury performed significantly better.
The findings suggest that early intervention targeting this pathway after brain injury could influence long-term neurological outcomes. In the study, treatments were administered to the animals within 48 hours after injury, but benefits were still measurable one month later.
“The timing is critical,” Subramanian said. “There’s a narrow window after brain injury where intervention may shape long-term outcomes.”
Current TBI treatments primarily focus on immediate symptom management rather than halting the progressive, underlying brain damage. This study isolates a highly specific, therapeutic target (the TLR4–MMP-9 axis) that can be intercepted in the critical window immediately following a concussion or head trauma to prevent lifelong neurological consequences.
“In a fascinating twist, we find that TLR4 isn’t just a ‘bad guy.’ In healthy, uninjured brains, TLR4 acts as a homeostatic regulator — a stabilizer keeping brain activity balanced,” said co-corresponding author Viji Santhakumar, a professor of molecular, cell and systems biology in whose lab the research was conducted.
Paradoxically, when the researchers blocked TLR4 signaling in healthy subjects, it caused memory issues and brain hyperexcitability.
“By identifying that the TLR4-MMP-9 pathway is activated exclusively after injury, we hope to move closer to pathway-specific preventive treatments without impacting normal brain function,” Santhakumar said.
Subramanian said the study also highlights the importance of taking all head injuries seriously, including mild concussions often associated with sports or falls, especially with the increase in the number of young people riding scooters without a helmet.
“Even mild concussions can internally trigger long-term changes in the brain,” he said.
The researchers caution that therapeutic targeting of immune signaling remains complex because both TLR4 and MMP-9 appear to play important roles in normal brain function as well.
“These systems operate within a very narrow Goldilocks zone,” Subramanian said. “Too much activation is harmful, but too little is also harmful because TLR4 and MMP-9 are necessary for normal brain plasticity and stability.”
The next phase of the research will focus on identifying the downstream molecular targets of MMP-9.
“We would like to understand the molecular underpinnings of the biological ‘switch’ that converts the stabilizing influence of TLR4 to an abnormal disruptive force after brain injury, and how these processes impact learning and memory,” Santhakumar said.
Funding: The study was funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Defense, with additional support from the National Institutes of Health and American Epilepsy Society.
Santhakumar and Subramanian were joined in the study by Erick Contreras, Laura Dovek, Razieh Jaberi, and Iryna M. Ethell. Two UCR undergraduate researchers, Emmanuel Greene and Ysabelle K. Lao, also contributed to the study.
Key Questions Answered:
Q: Why does a mild concussion cause long-term memory problems weeks after the initial physical impact?
A: Because the physical impact triggers a progressive, long-term molecular chain reaction. The concussion activates an immune receptor inside neurons called TLR4, which forces an enzyme named MMP-9 to flood the brain. This enzyme aggressively eats away at the extracellular matrix, the structural scaffold that holds neurons together. Without this scaffold, the brain loses its ability to balance electrical signals, replacing clear thoughts with chaotic network noise that permanently blocks memory formation.
Q: If blocking the TLR4-MMP-9 pathway cures brain injury damage, why can’t we take a daily preventative pill for it?
A: Because this pathway follows a strict Goldilocks zone and is required for everyday brain health. In a healthy, uninjured brain, TLR4 and MMP-9 act as essential stabilizers that maintain memory formation and baseline stability. Paradoxically, if you block this pathway in a healthy brain, it triggers the exact same hyperexcitability and memory problems seen in a concussion. Therefore, treatments must be strictly pathway-specific and deployed exclusively within a narrow window following a confirmed head injury.
Q: What is the most critical takeaway from this study regarding young people and modern sports or scooter injuries?
A: That mild concussions must be taken seriously because the internal damage is progressive. Many young people dismiss minor head bumps from falls or riding scooters without helmets because they feel fine a few hours later. This UC Riverside study proves that even mild concussions instantly set off an invisible neuro-immune cascade that slowly degrades brain circuits over the course of 30 days. Intervening within the first 48 hours is essential to halt this underlying damage before it translates into lifelong cognitive deficits.
Editorial Notes:
- This article was edited by a Neuroscience News editor.
- Journal paper reviewed in full.
- Additional context added by our staff.
About this concussion and neurology research news
Author: Iqbal Pittalwala
Source: UCR
Contact: Iqbal Pittalwala – UCR
Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News
Original Research: Open access.
“Neuronal toll-like receptor-4 regulation of matrix metalloproteinase-9 activity mediates dentate circuit dysfunction after traumatic brain injury” by Deepak Subramanian, Erick M Contreras, Laura Dovek, Razieh Jaberi, Emmanuel Green, Ysabelle K Lao, Iryna M Ethell & Vijayalakshmi Santhakumar. Journal of Neuroinflammation
DOI:10.1186/s12974-026-03890-4
Abstract
Neuronal toll-like receptor-4 regulation of matrix metalloproteinase-9 activity mediates dentate circuit dysfunction after traumatic brain injury
Neuroinflammatory pathways activated by traumatic brain injury (TBI) are critical mediators of long-term neurological dysfunction and represent promising therapeutic targets. Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), an innate immune receptor, was previously shown to contribute to increased seizure susceptibility and cognitive deficits in rats after lateral fluid percussion injury (FPI).
However, the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying TLR4-mediated circuit dysfunction early after brain injury are not fully understood.
In this study, we define a cell- and circuit- specific neuroimmune-enzyme effector signaling axis that mediates early post-TBI circuit dysfunction in the hippocampal Dentate Gyrus (DG). Using ex vivo electrophysiology in rat and mouse models one week after brain injury, we demonstrate that neuronal TLR4 signaling regulates both excitatory and inhibitory synaptic inputs to dentate granule cells (DGC).
Collectively, pharmacological inhibition of TLR4 in rats and cell-type-specific deletion of TLR4 in mice show that neuronal TLR4 mediates injury-driven increase in DGC excitatory input frequency and relies on downstream activation of Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9). In contrast, TLR4 signaling contributed to a decrease in inhibitory current frequency after injury, but independent of MMP-9, revealing a mechanistic divergence.
Systemic inhibition of either TLR4 signaling or MMP-9 activity in rats within 24 h after injury reduced network hyperexcitability and improved long-term potentiation (LTP) in the DG measured in vivo one week after injury. Either TLR4 or MMP-9 inhibition early after injury effectively attenuated spatial memory deficits in a Barnes maze task one month post-injury.
Paradoxically, in sham controls, inhibition of TLR4 increased the frequency of both excitatory and inhibitory inputs to DGCs and augmented network excitability, without altering MMP-9 levels, identifying context-dependent roles for TLR4 signaling.
Together, these results identify a novel TLR4 -MMP-9 axis as a key driver of early post-TBI dentate gyrus circuit dysfunction and behavioral deficits.
Join our Newsletter
I agree to have my personal information transferred to AWeber for Neuroscience Newsletter ( more information )
Sign up to receive our recent neuroscience headlines and summaries sent to your email once a day, totally free.
We hate spam and only use your email to contact you about newsletters. You can cancel your subscription any time.
Fortune: AI is supercharging cyberattacks
AI is supercharging cyberattacks—and most companies aren’t ready
By
Tech Reporter
June 9, 2026, 9:45 AM ET
Add us on

From automated hacking to AI‑powered scams, the new threats are forcing companies to rethink their broader approach to security.Illustration by Simon Landrein for Fortune
As companies rush to adopt AI across their operations, attackers are exploiting the same technology against them.
Recommended Video
From automated hacking to AI‑powered scams, the new threats are forcing companies to rethink their broader approach to security. Beyond hardening technical defenses, companies operating in the AI age need to examine a wide range of practices, say industry experts, updating the way software patches are deployed and rebuilding the human layer of security.
“Everybody needs to be on a war footing right now,” Mayank Upadhyay, chief security and trust officer at Snowflake, told Fortune. The attack surface across a typical enterprise—network, laptops, cloud infrastructure, logins—is now generating so much data that human teams can’t hope to triage without help from AI, he said.
For years, most organizations managed cyber risk on a predictable schedule. Security teams would discover flaws in their software, vendors would bundle fixes into periodic updates, and companies would decide when to install those patches—often weekly, monthly, or even quarterly. That slower, batch‑style approach existed, in part, because updating critical systems can mean taking them offline, and there is always a risk that a new patch breaks something important.
Now, widely accessible AI systems can scan codebases at scale, automatically generate exploits for the vulnerabilities they find, and in some cases deploy those exploits to infiltrate networks and steal data or take control of systems. This AI‑accelerated vulnerability discovery allows threats to be identified and weaponized in hours rather than days or weeks, outpacing the traditional patching cycle.
Experts and industry leaders say the answer is to fight AI with AI.
“You have to use AI. It’s not even a choice, because there’s just so much data,” said Upadhyay. “If you’re being attacked by AI, there’s not enough security specialists you can put in place to fight that.”
Anthropic’s new Mythos model, although currently available only to select companies, is a prime example of the critical role AI can play as a defensive tool. Steve Schmidt, Amazon’s chief security officer, told Fortune that Mythos not only helps to patch individual bugs but also helps to permanently close whole classes of weaknesses that have been lurking in their systems.
“Everything we’ve seen has shown that we are far more effective using AI as defenders than adversaries are using it for attacks,” he said. “The experience we have with…the Mythos model is that it is a significant advantage to the defender.”
However, he said, the model only really performs when it’s paired with experienced engineers, adding that left to run on its own, even the most advanced systems throw off so many false alarms that developers eventually stop trusting what they see.

Paid Content
How Lenovo made AI the backbone of its customer experience
From ServiceNow
A new era of workforce risk
The economics of attacks are shifting too. Sophisticated, tailored intrusions used to be reserved for high-value targets; small and midsize companies could rely on relative obscurity. AI changes that calculus, lowering the cost and skill required to launch a customized attack against almost any organization, said Hugh Thompson, executive chairman of the RSA Conference.
“The fact that these tools can go after so many potential victims at once is a game changer in mindset,” he said.
And while a lot of attention has been given to AI models’ ability to exploit technical vulnerabilities, there’s been less conversation about the risks around social engineering—using psychology to manipulate people into giving attackers data or access.
Social engineering attacks utilize things like phishing emails crafted to mimic a colleague’s writing style; vishing—voice calls impersonating IT support or a vendor; business email compromise, in which an attacker poses as a senior executive to authorize a fraudulent wire transfer; and increasingly, deepfake audio or video calls designed to convincingly replicate a real person. In one high‑profile case, criminals used an AI‑generated video and voice clone of a company’s finance chief on a live video call to trick an employee into wiring roughly $25 million to fraudulent accounts.
Preparing workers for these AI risks requires more than prerecorded training videos or the occasional phishing email test. And instead of thinking about the risk of one or two employees being targeted by a sophisticated phishing attack, companies need to be prepared for all employees to be regularly targeted.
According to research from Charlemagne Labs, an AI-security startup, AI models already widely available can now sustain believable, multi-turn deception—conversations that span many back-and-forth exchanges rather than a single message—which is the hardest part of real-world scams. AI models, the research found, may enable convincing, automated end-to-end scams within 12 to 24 months.
“Because most AI researchers are more familiar with technical hacking and exploits, we believe social engineering—still the attack genesis for the vast majority of attacks—has gotten too little attention,” says Jeremy Philip Galen, a former Meta product manager and CEO of Charlemagne Labs.
One way that Galen’s startup is trying to address this is with a system named Charley that uses AI to monitor incoming messages and warn users about likely scams, acting as a kind of always‑on scam filter in the background.
“You can’t really train people, and that’s scary. You can’t teach people to identify threats, which means we’re entering a new era of workforce risk,” he said.
Snowflake’s Upadhyay says his team is already running daily “war room” exercises that bring together application security, cloud infrastructure, IT, and security operations teams. The aim is to remove silos so they’re prepared to react at “AI speed,” using the same AI‑powered tools as they test their defenses and find gaps before attackers do.
Upadhyay says teams should be establishing what is a four-step cycle powered by AI: Set up defenses, monitor them for breaches, contain and clean up any attacks or vulnerabilities that break through, and then build new controls so the same weakness can’t be exploited again.
“Just automating that entire life cycle—it’s using AI to fight AI. This is the thing that everybody should be rushing to do at this moment,” he said.
Subscribe to Fortune Gulf Brief. Every Tuesday, this new newsletter delivers clear-eyed, authoritative intelligence on the deals, decisions, policies, and power shifts shaping one of the world’s most consequential regions, written for the people who need to act on it. Sign up here.
About the Author
By Beatrice NolanTech Reporter
Beatrice Nolan is a tech reporter on Fortune’s AI team, covering artificial intelligence and emerging technologies and their impact on work, industry, and culture. She’s based in Fortune‘s London office and holds a bachelor’s degree in English from the University of York. You can reach her securely via Signal at beatricenolan.08
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged ai, artificial-intelligence, cybersecurity, security, technology
Leave a comment
Random Acts of Kindness: A stroll along Heytesbury Lane and someone has left out a container with a vast selection of books. I chose Think Like A Shrink by Joseph Dunn, from Australia, and I just could not stop reading it. Thought someone else in the chain of life might like to share this hence AI Grok came up with the following:-
“Think Like a Shrink: And Keep Yourself Sane” by Dr. Joe Dunn (illustrated by Terry Denton) is a 1994 book (reissued in 2000) by an Australian psychiatrist who ran a busy practice in Sydney. It’s a witty, accessible, behind-the-scenes look at psychiatry rather than a strict self-help manual. Dunn uses real-life case studies from his practice to show how things commonly go wrong in people’s lives (relationships, stress, personality quirks, crises) and how psychiatry can actually help—without mystifying the profession or pathologizing everything.
He gently points out that “normal” life is largely a myth and presents the darker sides of human nature with sympathy, common sense, and tolerance. The goal is to demystify shrinks, explain when (and how) to seek help, and give readers tools to understand themselves and others better. It’s written in plain English, often humorous, and illustrated. Positive reader feedback highlights how readable and useful it is for both laypeople and professionals (especially for understanding relationship dynamics). One reviewer called it an “enjoyable romp through how a psychiatrist thinks—not a self-help book, but it does help.” Dr. Dunn has written other practical books (e.g., on midlife and dealing with difficult people) and later founded Psychs on Bikes, a charity bringing mental health support to rural and remote Australia via motorcycle-riding psychiatrists.Thinking Like a Shrink (Dunn-Style) to Keep Yourself Sane. Channeling Dr. Dunn’s approach means adopting a psychiatrist’s lens: curious, non-judgmental, pattern-seeking, and realistic about human messiness. Here’s how to apply that mindset day-to-day:
- “Normal” is a myth — embrace the spectrum. Everyone has quirks, defenses, blind spots, and rough patches. The goal isn’t perfection or constant happiness; it’s self-awareness and functioning well enough. This reduces shame when you (or others) struggle.
- Use your relationships as a mirror. How you show up in close relationships (intimacy, conflict, vulnerability) often reveals your emotional health more clearly than anything else. Pay attention to recurring patterns without beating yourself up.
- Look for patterns, not just symptoms. Shrinks love case studies because individual stories reveal universal dynamics. Track your own: What situations trigger the same reactions? What defenses do you use (denial, humor, withdrawal, overworking)? Naming the pattern is often half the battle.
- Demystify your own “craziness.” Most psychological struggles are understandable responses to life stress, trauma, biology, or learned habits—not personal failings. A little perspective (“This is my anxiety/depression/defensive style acting up”) can make it feel less overwhelming.
- Know when (and how) to get help. Dunn explains that psychiatry isn’t just for “crazy” people—it’s for anyone whose suffering is interfering with life. Early help is often more effective. Therapy, medication, lifestyle changes, or support networks are tools, not admissions of defeat.
- Cultivate tolerance + humor. Toward yourself and others. Human personality has a dark side; pretending otherwise causes more problems. A shrink’s tolerance + wry humor keeps things grounded.
Practical shrink-like habits to stay sane:
- Daily self-check-in: “What am I feeling? What do I need? What story am I telling myself?”
- Perspective shifts: “How would I advise a friend in this situation?” or “What would this look like in five years?”
- Relationship hygiene: Address issues early instead of letting them fester.
- Stress buffers: Sleep, movement, meaningful connections, and limits on rumination.
- Professional backup: Don’t wait until crisis mode. Many people benefit from short-term therapy or coaching.
If something specific is weighing on you (anxiety, relationships, burnout, overthinking, whatever), tell me more and I’ll think like a shrink with you—exploring patterns, offering perspective, and suggesting practical next steps. No judgment, just clarity and options.What’s on your mind, or would you like more details on the book itself?
Explore Dunn’s case studies
Thought for 21s
Dr. Joe Dunn’s case studies in Think Like a Shrink: And Keep Yourself Sane are central to the book’s appeal. They form the practical, human core of his approach. Purpose and Style of the Case Studies. Dunn, a Sydney-based psychiatrist, draws on anonymized real cases from his busy practice to:
- Demystify psychiatry (showing it’s not just for “crazy” people or long-term analysis).
- Illustrate common ways life unravels under modern stress.
- Demonstrate how psychiatric tools (insight, therapy, medication, perspective) can help without judgment.
- Hammer home his key theme: “Normal” life is largely a myth — we all have vulnerabilities, defenses, and dark spots, presented with sympathy and tolerance.
The cases are described in reviews and the book’s blurb as “instantly engaging,” witty, and grounded in practical experience. They’re woven narratively rather than as dry clinical reports, likely with Terry Denton’s illustrations adding humor or visual insight. Readers (including therapists) praise them for clarity in plain English and usefulness for understanding relationship dynamics in particular. Specific patient details (names, exact stories) are not publicly excerpted or detailed in available reviews or sources — this is standard ethical practice in psychiatric writing to protect privacy. The book (≈220 pages, 1994/2000 editions) uses them illustratively, not sensationally. What the Case Studies Likely Cover Based on the book’s stated goals, Dunn’s known clinical interests (mood disorders, chronic somatic issues, cancer-related emotional impacts, relationship counselling, psychodynamic psychotherapy), and the era/context, the cases probably explore everyday struggles like these (anonymized and generalized from the book’s spirit):
- Depression and the “black dog” — Patients whose low mood stems from a mix of biology, life events, and unhelpful thinking patterns. Dunn likely shows how it’s not weakness or “all in your head,” but something treatable, and how insight + support restores function.
- Relationship conflicts and patterns — Cases highlighting how childhood experiences, attachment styles, or defenses play out in adult partnerships. One reviewer specifically noted the book’s value here — e.g., recurring fights revealing deeper needs or projections.
- Anxiety, stress, and adjustment issues — Modern-life pressures (work, midlife transitions, loss) manifesting as worry, physical symptoms, or self-sabotage. Cases illustrate when these cross into clinical territory and how psychiatry helps without pathologizing normal reactions.
- Somatic presentations — Physical complaints (fatigue, pain, gut issues) with emotional roots. Dunn’s expertise suggests cases showing the mind-body link and integrated approaches.
- Personality quirks and “dark side” humanity — Sympathetic portrayals of defenses (denial, projection, people-pleasing), self-defeating behaviors, or how “successful” people can still struggle emotionally. The point: these are universal, not moral failings.
- When (and how) to seek help — Stories showing turning points — when self-help isn’t enough, what therapy or medication realistically offers, and how to navigate stigma or fear of shrinks.
Throughout, Dunn likely contrasts “before” (chaos, shame, stuck patterns) with “after” (clarity, tools, acceptance), using cases to teach readers to think like a shrink themselves: curious, pattern-spotting, non-judgmental, and realistic. Exploring the Approach: Thinking Like Dunn/ Dunn’s cases teach a shrink-like mindset for keeping sane:
- Observe without over-pathologizing — Everyone has blind spots and defenses. The goal is understanding, not labeling.
- Look at patterns and context — What triggers the issue? How does it play out in relationships? What’s the history?
- Integrate biology + psychology + life — Mood disorders aren’t purely “chemical” or purely “talking cure.”
- Emphasize hope and practicality — Psychiatry helps many people function better; it’s a tool, not a cure-all or identity.
- Normalize the human mess — Humor and tolerance reduce shame.
Applying this to yourself (a Dunn-style self-case study exercise):
- Presenting complaint — What’s bothering you right now (e.g., recurring anxiety in relationships, burnout, low mood)?
- History and patterns — When did it start? What makes it better/worse? Any echoes from earlier life?
- Defenses and meaning — How do you protect yourself (avoidance, overworking, humor)? What might it be protecting?
- Relationships as mirror — How does this show up with partners, family, or colleagues?
- What helps? — Past successes, small experiments, or when professional input might accelerate change.
- Perspective — “This is human, not broken.” What would a wise, tolerant shrink (or Dunn) say?
This mirrors how Dunn likely structures his cases — turning personal stories into teachable, empowering insights.If the book’s cases resonate because you want real-world examples of psychiatric thinking in action, or if you’d like me to explore a specific scenario (yours or a hypothetical one) in this style — framing it as a “case,” spotting patterns, offering shrink-like perspective, and practical sanity tips — just describe it. No judgment, just clarity and options.What aspect of Dunn’s cases interests you most, or shall we dive into one together?
Explore Dunn’s view on defenses
Thought for 9s
Dr. Joe Dunn’s view on psychological defenses, as expressed (or strongly implied) in Think Like a Shrink: And Keep Yourself Sane, fits the book’s overall tone: sympathetic, practical, demystifying, and tolerant of human imperfection. While no detailed public excerpts or direct quotes from the book specifically dissect “defenses” (they’re likely woven into the anonymized case studies rather than presented as a standalone theoretical chapter), we can reconstruct his perspective reliably from:
- The book’s core descriptions and themes.
- Dunn’s background as a psychiatrist practicing psychodynamic psychotherapy.
- His emphasis on showing “the dark side of the human personality in a manner that is sympathetic, sensible and tolerant.”
Core Elements of Dunn’s Likely View on Defenses. Dunn almost certainly sees defenses (or ego defense mechanisms) as universal, automatic, unconscious strategies the mind uses to protect us from anxiety, painful realities, unacceptable feelings, or threats to self-esteem. They are not “bad” or signs of weakness — they are part of being human. This aligns perfectly with his repeated point that “‘normal’ life is a myth.” In his case studies, defenses probably appear as the hidden engines behind why things go wrong in people’s lives:
- A patient in denial about a failing relationship or health issue.
- Someone projecting their own anger or insecurity onto a partner or colleague.
- Rationalization (“It’s not that bad — everyone does it”) that prevents real change.
- Acting out or somatization (turning emotional pain into physical symptoms or impulsive behavior).
Dunn’s tolerant lens would frame these not as character flaws but as understandable protective maneuvers that once served a purpose (often from childhood or past stress) but have become rigid or costly in the present. Psychiatry’s role, in his telling, is to gently bring them into awareness through insight — not to “strip them away” harshly, but to help people choose more adaptive ways of coping. This matches his broader approach: using real (disguised) cases from his Sydney practice to illustrate how psychiatry helps without mystifying it or shaming patients. Reviewers note the book’s particular usefulness for relationship dynamics — exactly where defenses often play out most visibly (e.g., one partner’s projection triggering the other’s withdrawal).
How Dunn Would Probably Categorize or Use DefensesDrawing from standard psychiatric understanding (which Dunn, as a trained psychiatrist using psychodynamic methods, would draw upon), defenses exist on a spectrum of maturity/adaptiveness:
- Immature/primitive defenses (more distorting of reality, often linked to greater distress): denial, projection, acting out, splitting (“all good or all bad”), somatization.
- Neurotic/intermediate defenses (common in everyday life, can cause problems when overused): repression, rationalization, reaction formation, intellectualization, displacement.
- Mature defenses (more adaptive, reality-based, and flexible): humor, sublimation (channeling impulses productively), suppression (consciously postponing dealing with something), altruism.
Dunn’s cases likely show patients moving — with help — from heavier reliance on immature defenses toward more mature ones. The goal isn’t eliminating defenses (impossible and undesirable) but gaining choice and flexibility. A person who can laugh at their own perfectionism (mature humor) instead of denying problems until they explode (immature denial) is functioning better and feeling saner.
Why This Matters for “Keeping Yourself Sane” In Dunn’s worldview:
- Defenses keep us temporarily sane by shielding us from overwhelming anxiety or shame.
- But when they become automatic and unexamined, they create the very problems they were meant to avoid — strained relationships, repeated self-sabotage, chronic low mood, or physical symptoms with no medical explanation.
- Insight (the “think like a shrink” part) reduces their unconscious power. You start noticing patterns (“There I go projecting again…”) without self-attack.
- This fosters self-compassion: “Of course I used denial — it protected me when I was younger. Now I have better tools.”
The book’s witty, case-based style probably makes this feel accessible and hopeful rather than heavy or jargon-filled. Readers come away understanding their own (and others’) quirks more kindly, which itself reduces shame — a major sanity-preserver.
Applying Dunn-Style Thinking to Defenses.If you want to explore this in your own life (the ultimate point of the book):
- Notice without judgment — What automatic reaction kicks in when you feel threatened, criticized, or anxious? (e.g., getting defensive and counter-attacking, shutting down, over-explaining, blaming others, minimizing the issue.)
- Ask the protective question — What painful feeling or reality is this defense shielding me from right now?
- Assess the cost/benefit — Does it help short-term but create bigger problems long-term (in relationships, self-esteem, or goals)?
- Experiment with flexibility — What slightly more mature alternative could I try? (A bit of humor? Gentle self-acknowledgment? Pausing before reacting?)
This is classic psychodynamic work in plain English — exactly the spirit Dunn brings to his cases.Would you like to pick a specific defense (yours or a common one) and explore it together Dunn-style — through a mini case-study lens, with tolerant insight and practical takeaways for staying sane? Or does something else from the book’s approach to the “dark side” of personality intrigue you more? I’m here for it.
Explore specific immature defense mechanisms
Immature (or primitive) defense mechanisms are the more distorting, reality-avoiding strategies the mind uses unconsciously to protect us from overwhelming anxiety, guilt, shame, or unacceptable feelings/impulses.
In Dr. Joe Dunn’s sympathetic, case-based style from Think Like a Shrink: And Keep Yourself Sane, these would likely appear in his anonymized patient stories as the “dark side” behaviors that cause repeated trouble in life and relationships — presented without judgment as understandable (if costly) human protections. Dunn’s tolerant lens would emphasize that everyone uses them to some degree (“normal” is a myth), they once served a purpose, and psychiatry helps by bringing gentle awareness so people can choose more flexible responses.
Here’s an exploration of the most classic immature defenses, drawn from standard psychiatric understanding (Freud, Anna Freud, George Vaillant’s hierarchy, and DSM influences) and framed in the spirit of Dunn’s practical, demystifying approach.
1. Denial What it is: Refusing to acknowledge a painful or threatening reality, even when evidence is clear. The mind simply says “this isn’t happening” or “it’s not that bad.”
How it protects: It shields against overwhelming fear, grief, or shame in the short term. Dunn-style example: A patient whose marriage is clearly falling apart keeps insisting “Everything’s fine — we just had a little argument” while ignoring mounting evidence (separate bedrooms, no intimacy, constant criticism). Or someone with clear signs of depression or a serious health issue says, “I’m just tired/stressed; it’ll pass.
”Why immature / the cost: It prevents problem-solving and often makes the situation worse over time. The defended-against reality eventually crashes in harder. Toward sanity (Dunn’s likely takeaway): Gentle insight in therapy helps the person acknowledge reality without collapsing. Dunn would probably show in a case how denial kept the patient “sane” temporarily but trapped them in suffering — and how facing it (with support) brought relief and better options.
2. Projection What it is: Attributing one’s own unacceptable thoughts, feelings, or impulses to someone else. (“I’m not angry — you’re the angry one!”). How it protects: It externalizes internal conflict so the person doesn’t have to own the “bad” feeling. Dunn-style example: A person who feels deep insecurity or inadequacy constantly accuses their partner of being critical or unfaithful. Or someone with unacknowledged rage interprets neutral comments as attacks and lashes out defensively.
In relationships (a strength of Dunn’s book per reviewers), this fuels endless cycles of blame.
Why immature / the cost: It damages relationships, creates paranoia or conflict, and blocks self-awareness. The projector keeps seeing their own issues in others. Toward sanity: Dunn’s tolerant approach would highlight how projection is a normal human reflex (we all do it sometimes) but becomes destructive when chronic. Case studies likely show patients gaining insight (“Maybe some of that anger I see in her is mine”) and reducing relationship drama.
3. Acting Out What it is: Expressing unconscious emotional conflicts or impulses through impulsive actions rather than words or reflection. The feeling bypasses thought and comes out as behavior.
How it protects: It discharges tension or anxiety physically instead of experiencing the painful emotion consciously. Dunn-style example: Someone who feels deep abandonment fears or rage after a breakup immediately starts a new intense relationship, drinks heavily, or makes reckless decisions. Or a patient skips therapy sessions or quits a job right after a difficult emotional discussion in session. In Dunn’s midlife or “painful people” themes, this might show up as self-sabotaging patterns that repeat across life.
Why immature / the cost: It often creates real-world consequences (legal, relational, health) and prevents learning or emotional growth. The underlying feeling remains unprocessed.Toward sanity: Psychiatry helps by slowing the action down — creating space to name the feeling first. Dunn would likely present this sympathetically: “Of course you acted out; it was the only way you knew to survive the feeling at the time.”
4. Splitting What it is: Seeing people, situations, or oneself in extreme black-and-white terms — all good or all bad, with no shades of gray. (Also called idealization/devaluation.) How it protects: It simplifies overwhelming complexity and protects against the anxiety of ambivalence or disappointment. Dunn-style example: A patient swings from idealizing their therapist or partner (“You’re the only one who understands me!”) to devaluing them completely after a minor disappointment (“You’re useless and don’t care”). Or someone views their own self as either a total success or total failure. This often appears in intense relationship cases Dunn might describe.
Why immature / the cost: It leads to unstable relationships, rapid mood shifts, and inability to integrate positive and negative qualities in self or others. It’s exhausting and confusing for everyone involved. Toward sanity: Insight-oriented work (Dunn’s psychodynamic style) helps the person tolerate ambivalence: “She can be caring and disappointing at the same time.” Cases would show how splitting keeps people stuck in dramatic cycles, and how seeing nuance brings stability.
5. Regression (and brief note on Somatization) Regression: Reverting to earlier, childlike behaviors or emotional states under stress (e.g., throwing tantrums, becoming overly dependent, or using baby talk). It protects by returning to a time when someone else handled problems.
Somatization (sometimes grouped here): Converting emotional distress into physical symptoms (headaches, stomach issues, fatigue) without conscious awareness of the link. In Dunn’s cases (given his interest in chronic somatic presentations), these would appear as patients whose bodies “speak” what their minds can’t yet tolerate.
Dunn-Style Takeaway on Immature Defenses Overall. These mechanisms are not evil or chosen maliciously — they’re the mind’s emergency toolkit. In Dunn’s witty, behind-the-scenes approach, case studies probably show patients using them heavily, suffering the consequences, then (with help) developing more mature alternatives like humor, sublimation, or suppression. The shift happens through tolerant awareness, not shame. Key insight for keeping yourself sane:
- Everyone uses immature defenses sometimes — especially under stress.
- The problem isn’t having them; it’s when they dominate and stay unconscious.
- Noticing them (“There’s my projection again…”) with curiosity instead of self-criticism is the first step toward flexibility.
- Psychiatry (per Dunn) demystifies this: “You’re not broken — your mind is doing its best to protect you. Let’s give it better tools.”
Which of these resonates most with something you’ve noticed in yourself, others, or a situation? Or would you like me to dive deeper into one (with a mini case-study example) or contrast it with more mature defenses in Dunn’s likely spirit? I’m ready to explore whichever direction helps most.
Contrast immature with mature defenses
Immature vs. Mature Defenses: A Dunn-Style Contrast In Dr. Joe Dunn’s sympathetic, case-driven approach in Think Like a Shrink: And Keep Yourself Sane, defenses are presented as normal, automatic human tools for managing anxiety and painful realities. Everyone uses them — that’s part of why “normal” is largely a myth. The key distinction isn’t moral (“good” vs. “bad” person) but functional: how well the defense protects you now while allowing you to stay connected to reality, relationships, and long-term well-being. Immature defenses tend to distort or avoid reality more heavily. They provide short-term relief but often create bigger problems later (especially in relationships, self-awareness, and emotional growth). Mature defenses are more reality-based and flexible — they acknowledge the difficulty while channeling energy constructively or managing it without major distortion. Here’s a clear contrast, framed through Dunn’s likely lens of tolerant insight via case studies:
Quick Comparison Table
| Aspect | Immature Defenses | Mature Defenses |
|---|---|---|
| Relationship to Reality | Heavily distort or deny reality | Acknowledge reality while managing discomfort |
| Conscious Awareness | Mostly unconscious and automatic | More conscious or semi-conscious choice |
| Short-term Effect | Quick relief from anxiety/shame | Manage discomfort without total avoidance |
| Long-term Effect | Often create more problems (conflict, stuck patterns, isolation) | Promote growth, better relationships, and resilience |
| Typical Examples | Denial, Projection, Acting Out, Splitting, Regression | Humor, Sublimation, Suppression, Altruism, Anticipation |
| Dunn-Style Case Flavor | Patient in denial about a failing marriage keeps insisting “everything’s fine” while it collapses | Patient acknowledges marital strain but uses humor or planned problem-solving to address it constructively |
Immature Defenses (Recap with Contrast)These appeared in our earlier exploration:
- Denial — “This isn’t happening.” (Avoids painful truth entirely.)
- Projection — “You’re the angry/untrustworthy one.” (Puts your feelings onto others.)
- Acting Out — Impulsive behavior instead of feeling the emotion (e.g., sudden affairs, quitting jobs, or rage outbursts after emotional triggers).
- Splitting — Black-and-white views (“You’re perfect!” then “You’re worthless!”).
In Dunn’s cases: These would likely show up as the repeating patterns that bring people to psychiatry — relationship blow-ups, self-sabotage, or physical symptoms that mask emotional pain. Dunn’s tolerant voice would say something like: “Of course your mind did this — it was trying to protect you. The cost is just getting too high now.”
Mature Defenses (The Healthier Alternatives)
These allow you to face difficulty without collapsing or lashing out. They’re not about being “perfectly rational” — they still protect, but with more flexibility and less collateral damage.
- Humor
Acknowledges the pain or absurdity while finding lightness.
Contrast example: Instead of denying marital problems (immature denial) or projecting blame, the person jokes gently with their partner: “We’re like two porcupines trying to hug — prickly but trying.” This reduces tension without avoidance and opens conversation.
Dunn-style takeaway: Humor appears in many of his witty case illustrations as a sign of growing sanity. - Sublimation
Channels unacceptable impulses or difficult emotions into productive, socially acceptable activities.
Contrast example: Rage or sexual frustration (which might lead to acting out immaturely) gets channeled into intense exercise, creative work, or advocacy.
Why better long-term: It transforms the energy instead of suppressing or exploding it. - Suppression
Consciously choosing to postpone dealing with something difficult until a better time (not the same as denial or repression).
Contrast example: After a bad day, deciding “I’ll think about this tomorrow when I’m rested” rather than ruminating all night or pretending nothing’s wrong.
Dunn-style: This shows up as practical self-management in his behind-the-scenes psychiatry stories. - Altruism
Helping others in a way that also meets one’s own emotional needs healthily (without self-erasure).
Contrast example: Instead of regressing into dependency or splitting people into “all good/all bad,” the person volunteers or supports others while staying grounded in their own needs. - Anticipation
Realistically planning for future stressors.
Contrast example: Preparing for a difficult conversation or life transition thoughtfully instead of denying it will happen or acting out in panic.
Why the Contrast Matters for Keeping Yourself Sane (Dunn’s Spirit)Immature defenses are like emergency brakes — useful in a real crisis but exhausting and damaging if left on all the time. Mature defenses are like good shock absorbers: they handle the bumps without derailing the whole journey. Dunn’s case studies probably demonstrate this shift repeatedly:
- A patient starts with heavy projection and splitting in relationships → through insight, moves toward humor and suppression.
- The result: Less drama, more stable connections, and greater self-compassion (“I was protecting myself the best way I knew how”).
Practical Dunn-style takeaway:
- You don’t have to eliminate immature defenses (they’re human wiring).
- The goal is awareness + flexibility — noticing when you’re using one (“Ah, there’s my projection again”) and gently choosing a more mature option.
- This reduces shame and increases sanity because you’re working with your mind instead of being run by its automatic protections.
Which pair of contrasts feels most relevant to something you’re noticing in your life or relationships right now? Or would you like a deeper dive into one mature defense with a mini case example, or help applying this contrast to a specific situation? I’m here to keep exploring in that clear, tolerant, shrink-like way.
Manic Depression/Bipolar : Schizophrenia?
Dr. Joe Dunn does not appear to have published detailed, publicly available quotes or dedicated sections specifically dissecting “manic depression” (the term commonly used in the 1990s for what we now call bipolar disorder) or schizophrenia in Think Like a Shrink: And Keep Yourself Sane. The book relies on anonymized, engaging case studies from his Sydney practice rather than textbook-style explanations of individual diagnoses. No reviews, excerpts, or searchable sources quote him directly on these conditions. However, we can reliably infer his approach from:
- The book’s core style and themes (demystifying psychiatry, sympathetic presentation of human struggles, “normal is a myth,” practical case studies showing how things go wrong and how psychiatry helps).
- His documented clinical interests as a psychiatrist: mood disorders (including bipolar disorder), psychodynamic psychotherapy, and making mental health accessible.
- The era of the book (1994/2000): Treatments focused on mood stabilizers (like lithium for bipolar), antipsychotics, and integrated care.
Dunn-Style View on These Conditions (Inferred from His Approach). Dunn would likely present manic depression/bipolar and schizophrenia through real-life (disguised) case studies that illustrate:
- How these serious conditions disrupt lives in understandable ways.
- The mix of biological, psychological, and social factors.
- That professional help (medication + insight/therapy) makes a real difference.
- Reduced stigma: These are not moral failings or “craziness” to be ashamed of — they are part of the spectrum of human vulnerability.
He would frame them tolerantly and accessibly, using his characteristic wit and behind-the-scenes perspective to put readers at ease with psychiatry. On Manic Depression (Bipolar Disorder). Dunn’s explicit interest in mood disorders suggests he would describe it as a condition involving extreme mood swings — periods of deep depression alternating with mania or hypomania (elevated energy, reduced need for sleep, grandiosity, risky behavior, racing thoughts). In case-study form, he might show:
- A high-functioning professional whose manic episodes lead to impulsive decisions (spending, affairs, career risks) followed by crushing depressive crashes.
- How denial or other immature defenses (which we explored earlier) can delay help during mania (“I’ve never felt better!”).
- The value of mood stabilizers, alongside therapy to understand triggers, manage defenses, and build stability.
- Emphasis on early recognition and treatment to prevent damage to relationships and life.
His tone would be hopeful and practical: These episodes are real and biologically rooted but manageable. Psychiatry helps people regain control without pathologizing every emotional high or low. He’d likely note that many people with bipolar live full, productive lives once properly supported.
On Schizophrenia. Schizophrenia would be presented more cautiously as a psychotic disorder involving disruptions in thinking, perception (hallucinations, delusions), emotions, and behavior. Dunn would stress it is not the same as “split personality” (a common myth) and is treatable with antipsychotics, support, and therapy.In his case studies, expect examples showing:
- How symptoms emerge (often in late teens/early adulthood) and how they affect daily functioning and relationships.
- The role of stress, vulnerability, and sometimes defenses (e.g., denial of illness or projection).
- The importance of medication to reduce acute symptoms, combined with psychosocial support.
- Compassionate portrayal: People with schizophrenia are not “dangerous madmen” but individuals whose brains process reality differently, often with significant strengths alongside challenges.
His demystifying goal would shine here — explaining symptoms plainly, showing how psychiatry helps rather than controls, and countering fear or stigma. He’d likely highlight that with treatment many people achieve stability and meaningful lives. Connecting to Dunn’s Broader Themes. These conditions would fit his pattern of using cases to show:
- Defenses in action: Mania might involve grandiosity or denial; schizophrenia might involve projection or other mechanisms to manage terrifying experiences.
- “Normal is a myth”: Everyone has vulnerabilities; serious mental illness is an extreme on the human spectrum, not something alien.
- When and how psychiatry helps: Medication for biological aspects + insight-oriented work (psychodynamic elements he practices) for psychological understanding and better coping.
- Keeping yourself (or loved ones) sane: Early help, reducing shame, building supportive relationships, and realistic hope.
Dunn’s overall message across the book is empowering:
Psychiatry is a useful tool for real human problems, not something to fear. His cases would humanize these diagnoses rather than sensationalize them.Since no verbatim passages are publicly available, this reflects the consistent spirit of his writing and clinical focus. If you have access to a physical copy of the book, checking the case studies section would give the most direct insight.Would you like me to:
- Explore a hypothetical Dunn-style case study of bipolar or schizophrenia (with defenses and mature coping contrasted)?
- Discuss general psychiatric understanding of these conditions in an accessible, shrink-like way?
- Or dive into something else from the book (e.g., how he might link them to relationship dynamics or midlife issues)?
Just let me know how to keep exploring.
Explore Dunn’s case studies on mood disorders
Discuss psychodynamic defenses in bipolar disorder
Provide a hypothetical Dunn-style case study
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged healing, mental-health, psychology, relationships, trauma
Leave a comment
Futurism: Furious Judge … reaction to Lawyers on both sides using AI
Furious Judge Cancels Entire Trial After Finding Out Lawyers on Both Sides Used AI
“This court is yet again ‘burdened with addressing AI hallucinations court filings.'”
Published Jun 11, 2026 12:57 PM EDT
Add Futurism(opens in a new tab)More information

Sign up to see the future, today
Can’t-miss innovations from the bleeding edge of science and tech Email address Sign Up
Lawyers just can’t stop being caught using AI chatbots, polluting their filings with hallucinated citations that infuriate judges when they’re caught. Even prestigious law firms are being humiliated, with some perpetrators getting slapped with fines and facing discipline from the Bar.
In a particularly egregious reminder of just how widespread the problem has become, a United States district judge in Mississippi found out that lawyers from both sides of a recent case had used AI. As 404 Media reports, Northern District of Mississippi judge Sharion Aycock berated everybody involved in a sanctions order, ultimately fining them, canceling the trial, and barring half of them from appearing in the district’s court for two years.
“This case presents the Court with an unusual scenario — attorneys for both litigants engaged in similar sanctionable conduct,” she wrote. “This court is yet again ‘burdened with addressing AI hallucinations court filings.’”
Lawyer Rob Freund first spotted the gaffe, calling it a “comedy of AI errors,” in a tweet.
The case involved four lawyers total, who were fighting over unpaid legal fees. Two of them represented plaintiff and lawyer Tom Withers, while the other two represented the city of Aberdeen, Mississippi. Withers brought a “single breach of contract claim against the city,” per Aycock.
But the court quickly determined that filings from both parties “contained hallucinatory citations.”
In a January 20 hearing, a lawyer representing Withers named Kathryn Williams “admitted to using an AI tool to conduct legal research,” while another lawyer representing the city, Kathleen Wilson, “admitted to using generative AI to draft her response filing,” according to Aycock.
“Neither of them verified the legal authority output by AI before filing their briefs,” she wrote, adding that “each of the attorneys expressed embarrassment and apologized to the Court.”
Wiliams and Wilson have since been ordered to pay fines ranging from $1,000 to $3,500. Both were barred from appearing before any case in the local Northern District of Mississippi for two years. All four lawyers involved were disqualified from participating in the case any further.
Worse yet, Aycock revealed that Wilson had attempted to argue that she was “unaware that AI could produce hallucinated cases and explained that she did not even know what a hallucinated case was.”
“The Court finds that explanation to be insufficient and incredulous,” the judge wrote.
Williams also attempted to absolve herself, arguing that the “in-house” AI research tool she used wasn’t supposed to hallucinate cases either, an excuse that didn’t sit much better with the judge, either.
In short, it’s a particularly glaring reminder how often lawyers are resorting to use AI, resulting in chaos in the courtroom. According to a 2025 report, hallucinations remain pervasive in filings — easily avoidable errors that are bogging down legal proceedings and eroding trust.
More on lawyers and AI: Prestigious Wall Street Law Firm Humiliated When Its AI Use Is Discovered in Court
Victor Tangermann
Senior Editor
I’m a senior editor at Futurism, where I edit and write about NASA and the private space sector, as well as topics ranging from SETI and artificial intelligence to tech and medical policy.
Most Popular
Scientists Have Detected Something Deeply Alarming at the Bottom of the Ocean
By Joe Wilkins
OpenAI Execs Are Panicking
The Beatles Just Released Their Final Song That Resurrects John Lennon’s Voice With AI
The More Data We See About SpaceX’s IPO, the More We’re Wincing
Microsoft Runs Ghoulish AI Poll Next to Article About a Dead Woman
The Cradle: —— Iranian negotiators involved in ongoing peace talks with Washington have recently integrated senior psychologists into their diplomatic team to review all communications intended for US President Donald Trump, believing him to be “legitimately mentally ill” and operating in a “mentally incapacitated” state.
Iranian negotiators enlist psychologists to tailor diplomatic communications for President Trump
—— Iranian negotiators involved in ongoing peace talks with Washington have recently integrated senior psychologists into their diplomatic team to review all communications intended for US President Donald Trump, believing him to be “legitimately mentally ill” and operating in a “mentally incapacitated” state.
According to investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill, who cited Iranian sources during a 12 June “Breaking Points” podcast episode, these experts were added to the team a few weeks ago to help navigate what the Iranians describe as a clinical challenge.
By developing a psychological profile of the President, the negotiators have begun “catering” their messages—running them past the psychologists before delivery through mediators—to better suit his perceived mental state.
Sources indicate this approach, which treats the President essentially as a “patient,” has already yielded progress in negotiations. This “clinical diplomacy” comes as Trump faces renewed scrutiny regarding his physical and mental fitness as he approaches his 80th birthday.
Recent reports of him dozing off during meetings and exhibiting various physical symptoms have heightened international concerns, leading the Iranian team to adopt this unconventional, medically-informed strategy for their high-stakes diplomatic interactions.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Fortune: Live updates from SpaceX IPO debut: SpaceX valuation at $2.1 trillion as stock closes at $161.11 following record first day of trading
Search
Trendingnow
1
2
When SpaceX starts trading, some ‘shareholders’ will discover they own nothing at all
3
Live updates from SpaceX IPO debut: SpaceX valuation at $2.1 trillion as stock closes at $161.11 following record first day of trading

By
News Editor
June 12, 2026, 10:42 AM ET
Updated June 12, 2026, 4:52 PM ET
Add us on

Live updates from what could be the biggest IPO in stock market history.TIMOTHY A. CLARY / AFP via Getty Images
Friday marked one of the biggest days in stock market history as SpaceX, the most hotly anticipated stock market debut ever, blew past expectations in its first day of trading. Elon Musk’s rocket, satellite, and AI empire made its long-awaited debut on both the Nasdaq Global Select Market and Nasdaq Texas under the ticker SPCX, capping a 24-year run as the most valuable, and most scrutinized, private company in the world. SpaceX opened at just above $150 a share (up 11.11% from the $135 IPO price) just after 11:46AM. Trading turnover exceeded $11.4 billion at open.
Recommended Video
The valuation surged Musk’s net worth above $1 trillion and SpaceX’s valuation to more than twice that—with the company’s market cap reaching $2.1 trillion.
The official trading start was delayed due to intense order matching activity, in which investors who refreshed brokerage accounts on Friday morning saw that SPCX was public, but there were no trades.
At noon Friday, the stock was hovering between $162 and $165. By 1PM, it soared to $175, up nearly 30% from its target price, before settling at above $169. An hour later, SpaceX traded more than 360 million shares, 10 times the total volume that 2026’s second-largest IPO, Cerebras, posted in its first day of trading.
Thirty minutes before market close, the stock remained steady at just over $162, and more than 172 million shares were traded on Nasdaq alone, taking over a record previously held by Nokia, which became the second-most active stock on the exchange.
SpaceX closed at $161.11, marking its historic first day of public trading on the Nasdaq with a surge of nearly 20%.
By midafternoon, SpaceX’s merch store began selling eight new items to honor their IPO. They include a $45 tote bag and a $15 sticker reading the SPCX ticker, as well as two separate t-shirts reading “The future is public.”
Musk addresses SpaceX employees at Nasdaq before debut
Ahead of the debut, the rocket, satellite and AI company’s CEO Elon Musk addressed Nasdaq in Texas, reiterating the company’s extraterrestrial goals. “SpaceX wants to be able to take you to the moon,” Musk said. “I am confident at this point that with the incredible team that we have here at SpaceX, that we will do that for you.”
He told the crowd of SpaceX employees at Nasdaq’s Starbase, Texas location that at first, he didn’t have high hopes for the company that today, could potentially make him the world’s first trillionaire. “I gave SpaceX less than a 10% chance of succeeding at all.”
Still, he said, after more than two decades of prototypes, failed launches and eventual success that has culminated in the Falcon 9 Block 5—the world’s most reliable rocket—Musk said that his initial out-of-this-world fascination still remains at the company.

Paid Content
What business jet passengers really want from in-flight Wi-Fi
From Viasat
“That’s what SpaceX is all about, is take science fiction and create an exciting, inspiring future for everyone,” Musk said. “We want to be able to take anyone who wants to go to the moon, anyone who wants to go to Mars… not just a few astronauts, I mean, you, literally you.”
“There are always problems on Earth,” he concluded, moments before Elton John’s ‘Rocket Man’ started playing. “But there also have to be things that get you excited about the future, that make you glad to wake up in the morning, because you can’t wait to see what happens next.”
At New York’s Nasdaq, SpaceX CEO Gwynne Shotwell rang the opening bell, with SpaceX employees wearing green shoes in a nod to the IPO’s “greenshoe” overallotment option. Fortune’s Shawn Tully explained how this mechanism allows underwriters to sell additional shares in an IPO to ensure stability while responding to the increase in investor demand.
Speaking at the Times Square ceremony after ringing the opening bell, Shotwell said, “Today, we make history again, and we have a history of making history. We’re about 22,000 strong, and thanks go to all of you for hanging in there, for keeping a straight spine as the doubters doubt, to achieve historic things every day.”
The offering priced Thursday afternoon—which was announced in a free-writing prospectus filed with the SEC just after 3 p.m. ET, while markets were still open—was at $135 a share for 555.6 million shares, raising the $75 billion the company targeted and valuing it at $1.77 trillion. Underwriters hold a 30-day option to purchase up to 83.3 million additional shares, which would lift the total raise to $86.25 billion.
That valuation makes it the largest IPO in stock market history: the raise is nearly triple the previous record, set when Saudi Aramco collected $25.6 billion on Riyadh’s exchange in December 2019 at a $1.71 trillion valuation. (One caveat for the record books: in inflation-adjusted terms, Aramco raised the equivalent of $33.2 billion at a $2.21 trillion valuation—so by that measure, the Saudi oil giant’s crown isn’t fully relinquished.) The offering covers only about 4% of SpaceX’s roughly 13.08 billion shares outstanding, making the company worth more today than Tesla was the day it became the world’s most valuable automaker.
The $1.77 trillion price tag instantly makes SpaceX the sixth-most valuable company in the U.S. and seventh-most valuable worldwide, ahead of Meta and Tesla—despite posting a $4.9 billion net loss in 2025 on $18.7 billion in revenue, the vast majority of it from Starlink. At the IPO price, investors are paying roughly 94 times trailing revenue for a company whose combined entity with xAI has racked up an accumulated deficit of $41.3 billion.
And unlike most newly public companies, SpaceX won’t have to wait long for index money to find it. Don’t look for it in the S&P 500: the benchmark requires sustained profitability, which SpaceX doesn’t have. But under a Nasdaq rule change that took effect in May, megacap debuts can join the Nasdaq-100 in as little as 15 trading days rather than the usual three months, and FTSE Russell and other index providers have agreed to fast-track inclusion as well—meaning trillions of dollars in passive retirement and pension money could soon hold SpaceX whether savers chose it or not.
How people are reacting to the debut
Sen. Bernie Sanders, a long time vocal opponent of the billionaire class who has sometimes publicly shared some words with the SpaceX founder, called it an “absurdity” for the world’s first trillionaire to pay the same in taxes as someone who makes less than $200,000 a year.
“Today, Elon Musk, a trillionaire, pays the same amount into Social Security as someone making $184,500,” the Vermont senator said on X, owned by Musk. “If we end that absurdity and lift the cap on taxable income, we can make Social Security solvent for 75 years and expand benefits by $2,400. My Social Security bill does that.”
Sanders’ colleague Sen. Elizabeth Warren also expressed concern with Musk’s wealth.
“Elon Musk just became the world’s first trillionaire,” Warren wrote on X. “The typical American household would have to work more than 11 MILLION years to make Elon Musk’s level of wealth.”
Fortune’s Eva Roytburg was on scene outside Nasdaq before the stock opened on Friday, where supporters of Musk and the company were spotted wearing astronaut costumes and discussing their potential ownership of the stock. A few blocks away, about two dozen protesters were outside the JP Morgan Chase headquarters chanting “shame, shame, shame” at Musk’s new trillionaire status.
A16Z general partner Katherine Boyle on X repeated a line from Musk’s address to employees and added “Only in America. Congratulations to @elonmusk @SpaceX. This is the American Dream.”
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani used Musk’s new decimal place to bring it back to one of his campaign promises. “Reason #1,000,000,000,000 why we should tax the rich,” the Democratic-socialist mayor posted on X.
The road to Wall Street
After more than a decade of fueling fanfare over the possible public offering of his company, Musk would often dangle a possible IPO just to dismiss it almost immediately afterwards. For the most part of the last 14 years, a SpaceX IPO became a running joke among investors: Musk would repeatedly promise a public offering at a later date, just for that date to arrive and for Musk to call those claims speculative at best. In 2012, he told Bloomberg there was “a good chance that SpaceX goes public next year.” A few years later, he said the company would only go public after the Mars Colonial Transporter, the precursor to Starship, began shuttling humans to Mars.
In 2019, he told SpaceX employees in an email it would “make sense to take Starlink public in about three years or so,” and in 2020, he promised again an IPO, “but only several years in the future when revenue growth is smooth and predictable. Public market does not like erratic cash flow.” Musk was still playing defense in 2024, after SpaceX ran a $112-a-share insider tender that valued the company at roughly $210 billion (up from $180 billion in a tender just months earlier). He pointed to the litigation over his Tesla pay package as a reason SpaceX should remain private, posting that “the legal load and pressure for short-term results for a public company are very high.”
It may be that very rationale that changed his mind when reports of yet another will-he-or-won’t-he with regard to a SpaceX IPO resurfaced last year. The rise of orbital AI compute, coupled with Starship’s maturation to the point where demands for capital would dwarf whatever private markets would be able to cleanly supply, could be the reason why Musk finally chose to file an S-1 on April Fools’.
The public S-1 dropped on May 20, and the subsequent road show launched on June 4, a week earlier than expected as the SEC completed its review ahead of schedule. The roadshow—where a company’s executives and underwriters pitch their stock offering to institutional investors—drew $250 billion in orders and was underwritten by a 21-bank syndicate, led by Goldman Sachs and with Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup and JPMorgan rounding out the top five.
There’s one big concern hanging over the debut: Starship, the vehicle at the center of SpaceX’s most ambitious projections, is currently grounded while the FAA conducts a mishap investigation into its most recent test flight.
An unconventional man whose ideas are out of this world
Musk founded SpaceX in 2002 as a means to answer what many children eventually grow out of the habit of asking: what’s out there on the red planet? Now, the IPO could make the man with extraterrestrial sights the first trillionaire in history.
Using $100 million of his PayPal proceeds, Musk visited Russia three times to buy refurbished Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) for a Mars greenhouse stunt. Upon his return, he realized rocket materials accounted for roughly 2% of a typical launch cost, and he decided to build some himself. Throughout the years, he launched several liquid-fueled rockets—some fell, and some fell flat—and would eventually call for data centers and even communes on Mars.
However, the 300-plus-page IPO prospectus itself claims a total addressable market of $28.5 trillion, a figure the company calls the largest in human history, even as it acknowledges the speculative and “improbable” nature of its Mars timeline.
The IPO is as unconventional as the man behind it. Usually, most companies set a price range and let the book-building process find the clearing price. In this case, SpaceX simply told investors what the stock would cost, fixing $135 a share before the roadshow even began, and making Thursday night’s pricing a formality. It also reserved roughly 30% of shares for retail investors, about three times the typical allocation for an offering of this size.
As a result, it’s close to four times oversubscribed: investors placed more than $250 billion in orders, roughly three and a half to four times the shares on offer, meaning many buyers will receive a fraction of what they requested, or nothing at all. Post-offering, Musk will retain control through a multi-class share structure that, according to a letter from New York’s state and city comptrollers and the head of CalPERS, gives him as much as 85% of voting power despite owning about 42% of the equity. As the pension officials put it, removing the company’s most powerful officer would, as a mathematical matter, require his own vote, making him effectively unfireable without his consent.
Morningstar, the market’s most prominent bear, pegs SpaceX’s fair value at $780 billion, or roughly 55% below the IPO valuation. It argued that neither a rapidly reusable Starship nor commercially competitive orbital data centers has been demonstrated, and that retail investors will likely find better entry points after listing.
History is written by the victors
The hype surrounding SpaceX’s debut left analysts wondering ahead of Friday whether the stock could possibly live up to it. Historically, among the largest public offerings on record, the odds of a company posting negative returns in its first three months are roughly a coin flip.
Take Saudi Aramco, the previous record holder: it rose 10% on its first day in December 2019, briefly pushing its valuation to about $1.88 trillion and past Apple as the world’s most valuable listed company. Within months, amid the oil crash and COVID selloff, it had fallen below its offer price.
You can blame oil markets for that one, but the tech-growth story powering SpaceX is the same one that plagued Facebook’s May 2012 debut. The social network fell nearly 50% in its first three months and traded below its $38 offer price for more than a year before becoming one of the best-performing mega-cap IPOs ever. Internationally, SoftBank Corp dropped 14.5% on its first day in Tokyo in December 2018 and spent years below its offer price.
Other companies thrived in the months following their IPO, and even eked out a path to secure strong market domination during some of the economy’s worst years. Six months before Lehman Brothers collapsed, Visa raised $17.9 billion in March 2008 and thrived through the Great Recession. The largest U.S. IPO previously belonged to Alibaba, which raised $21.8 billion in 2014 and earned the company a $231 billion market cap at listing.
SpaceX is the first of a hotly anticipated “IPO summer.” Anthropic filed its confidential S-1 on June 1; OpenAI followed a week later, targeting a September debut at an $852 billion valuation. If both land before year’s end, 2026 will close as the year public markets finally had to price artificial general intelligence.
The Fortune 500 Innovation Forum will convene Fortune 500 executives, U.S. policy officials, top founders, and thought leaders to help define what’s next for the American economy, Nov. 16-17 in Detroit. Apply here.
About the Author
By Catherina GioinoNews Editor
Catherina covers markets, the economy, energy, tech, and AI.

Flashback: Netanyahu made clear from the beginning that he believed the war could spur regime change in Tehran.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei is interviewed on “The Circuit with Emily Chang” at Anthropic headquarters in San Francisco in April. Photo: Jason Henry/Bloomberg via Getty Images
The administration tried to get Anthropic to pause releasing the latest models but was unsuccessful, the official said, prompting the export control letter.