Psychology Today: John Nosta.


1 of 1,575

AI vs. Human Experience: Where Words Fall Short. AI vs Human Experience

Inbox

John Nosta via Psychology Today <noreply@psychologytoday.com> UnsubscribeSun, Apr 26, 8:29 PM (14 hours ago)
to me
View in web browser
AI vs. Human Experience: Where Words Fall Short Exploring the elusive divide between AI representation and experience.John NostaBy John Nosta

KEY POINTS:AI masters description but can never deliver experience.The real risk is fluency that hides the missing depth.We may be losing the instinct to notice the difference.Alexa/PixabaySource: Alexa/Pixabay

When I was in college, we made a compound in organic chemistry that smelled like a banana. It was called amyl acetate. If you closed your eyes, it was convincing enough to make you smile. But it wasn’t a banana. Today that playful distinction no longer feels trivial because we’ve built systems that live entirely on the description side of the boundary. I can describe a banana split in exhaustive detail—cost, temperature, the viscosity of melting ice cream against other ingredients—and still not tell you what it is. There is a moment when description ends and experience begins, and that moment only arrives with a spoon. The same is true of love. Shakespeare and Rumi have approached it from different directions, each line of words bringing us closer to something we recognize. But no cluster of language ever becomes the thing itself. Love is not understood until it happens to you. Until it changes you.

There is a boundary here and on that we feel more than we define. Representation can approach experience with an almost asymptotic fidelity, yet never become it.

Where Description Stops
The key insight here is that you can know everything about something and still not know what it is. That isn’t a failure of information. This gap isn’t about quantity, it’s about what information can never be. Experience carries properties that description cannot capture. It is irreversible and unfolds in the context of time. You can’t un-experience something any more than you can unlearn a moment that has changed you.

Language, in direct contrast, is free of consequence as it can describe without being changed. That distinction has always been part of being human. What feels different now is where it shows up.

One Absence, Seven Names
We’ve begun to build artificial intelligence that operates entirely within representation. Large language models generate sentences that are remarkably coherent and hard to distinguish from genuine understanding. But fluency is not understanding, and the feeling of depth is not depth. That’s a sentence worth reading twice.

A fascinating paper by Quattrociocchi and associates identifies seven places where human and artificial cognition structurally diverge. But to me, what their taxonomy doesn’t quite say is that all seven point back to the same absence of experience. The authors call the resulting condition Epistemia—the sensation of having an answer without having done the work of forming one.

I’ve been thinking about this as a question of direction rather than deficit. We need to understand that human cognition moves through experience and is permanently altered in this process. AI moves across representations, mapping patterns in language and recombining them with techno-precision. And this can feel, from the outside, indistinguishable from thought. Both can arrive at the same sentence without arriving there the same way. I’ve called this anti-intelligence. A system that produces cognitively valid outputs without the conditions that make cognition real. The Danger Isn’t the GapAI gets us close enough to be fooled, and that’s where the real problem begins. The sentence is convincing, the explanation lands squarely in a place of logical contentment. And it’s easy to assume that as representation improves it will eventually cross into experience. But the banana chemical can become arbitrarily more precise and still not be a banana. There is no gradual crossing, only approach.What concerns me more than the gap itself is what Epistemia does to the person on the receiving end. It doesn’t just deliver the sensation of an answer, it gradually erodes the habit of noticing when something is missing.Experience leaves a mark or even a cognitive scar that description never really replicates. And once that mark fades, we might not miss it. That’s the part worth worrying about.John Nosta John NostaThe Digital Self Technology, Transformation and the Future You
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Axios: AM Special Report: Living history

2 of 1,579

📜 Axios AM Special Report: Living history

Inbox

Mike Allen UnsubscribeSun, Apr 26, 8:46 PM (13 hours ago)
to me
  View in browser PRESENTED BY META Axios AM Deep DiveBy Mike Allen · Apr 26, 2026

This special report brings you Axios’ latest reporting on how Washington responded to the attack on last night’s White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

Thanks to executive editor Kate Marino for leading this special issue, and to Axios journalists nationwide — some working with kids in their laps — who logged on to help bring you trustworthy, illuminating coverage.Catch up quick on the investigation.Smart Brevity™ count: 1,363 words … 5 mins.  1 big thing: Future in limbo for D.C. tradition The Washington Hilton ballroom emptied after last night’s scare. Photo: Tom Brenner/AP

For decades, the White House Correspondents’ Dinner has been a treasured tradition, uniting the press and politicians under one roof at the storied Washington Hilton. Now, the future of that ritual is in question, Axios’ Sara Fischer writes.

Why it matters: Last night’s intruder will force security officials and the White House Correspondents’ Association to reconsider whether it’s safe to host the dinner again in that venue, and how the event may need to evolve. 

President Trump said last night that the dinner will be held again within 30 days. Media executives Axios spoke with are skeptical that it’ll be staged exactly the same way.

Hundreds of corporate executives, diplomats and even celebrities fly in for the event, many with their own security teams and protocols.

The event requires months of planning for attendees, journalists and administration officials, let alone police and the Secret Service. 

Zoom in: The dinner, which takes place in the basement ballroom at the Washington Hilton — the same hotel where President Reagan was shot in 1981 — seats 2,000-plus people at nearly 260 tables. Those tables are packed so closely that it can be tough to even get out to walk to the restrooms.

After the attack, the Secret Service leaped on tables, across fallen chairs — even over guests — as they yanked Cabinet members from the room.Screenshot: Truth Social

How it works: Various news organizations host pre-parties at the Hilton that include guests not attending the dinner. So there were likely hundreds more people in the hotel — in close proximity to dozens of officials and CEOs — who weren’t even attending the dinner. 

The big picture: Since 9/11, government buildings have become much less accessible to the public. But many big public establishments, including the Washington Hilton, remain easy to enter.

The bottom line: The dinner this year was supposed to represent a rare moment of bonding between the administration and the press. It became a wake-up call about security risks that could upend the tradition.    
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

A Persian scholar finished a single math book in 9th century Baghdad that quietly became the foundation for every line of code running on Earth today. Quote: “When Alan Turing built the first abstract model of computation in 1936, when John von Neumann designed the first stored-program computer in 1945, when every engineer at Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, and DeepMind writes code in 2026, they are working in a paradigm that started with one man in Baghdad twelve centuries ago.”

@ihtesham2005

A Persian scholar finished a single math book in 9th century Baghdad that quietly became the foundation for every line of code running on Earth today. I started reading about him at midnight and could not believe how many things in my daily life trace back to one man.

His name was Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi. The book is called The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing. Every time you say the word algebra, you are saying his book title. Every time someone says the word algorithm, they are saying his name. Both English words come from him. Both are Latin transliterations of Arabic and of his own identity. The man did not just contribute to mathematics. He named it. Here is the part almost nobody tells you. Al-Khwarizmi was born around 780 CE in Khwarazm, in what is now Uzbekistan. He moved to Baghdad and worked at a research institution called the House of Wisdom, which during the Islamic Golden Age was the single most important center of learning on the planet. The caliph al-Mamun hired the best mathematicians, astronomers, and philosophers from across three continents and put them in one building with one job. Translate, study, and produce new knowledge.

Al-Khwarizmi finished his book on algebra around 820 CE. The Arabic title contained the word al-jabr, which referred to one of the two operations he used to solve equations. When the book was translated into Latin in the 12th century, the Latin world did not have a word for what he had built. So they kept his Arabic word. Al-jabr became algebra. The discipline was named after a single Arabic word in the title of a single book by a single man.

The deeper insight is what he actually changed about how humans think. Before al-Khwarizmi, mathematical problems were solved geometrically. You drew shapes. You measured them. You compared areas. The Greeks had built an entire mathematical tradition on visual proofs and physical constructions. It was beautiful and limited. You could not solve a problem you could not draw. Al-Khwarizmi did something nobody had done before him at this scale. He said you could solve any problem using abstract symbols and rules. You did not need a shape. You needed a procedure. You moved terms across the equation. You cancelled like terms on both sides. You isolated the unknown. He invented the idea that mathematics is a manipulation of symbols according to rules, not a study of physical figures. That single shift made everything that came afterward possible.

Calculus. Differential equations. Linear algebra. Quantum mechanics. None of it works if math is locked inside geometry. He pulled it out. The second thing he did is the one that changed how the world counted forever. He took the Hindu numeral system from Indian mathematics, refined it, and wrote a book introducing it to the Arab world. That system included the concept of zero as a placeholder, and a positional notation where the value of a digit depends on its location.

Roman numerals could not do complex calculation. Hindu-Arabic numerals could. When his book on numerals was translated into Latin as Algoritmi de numero Indorum, the word Algoritmi was just the Latin spelling of his own name. Europeans started calling the new method “doing algorism,” then “running an algorithm.” The word for the most important concept in computer science is literally his name in Latin. The third thing he did is the part that should haunt anyone who works in tech. His method of solving problems was systematic. Step one, do this. Step two, check that. Step three, if condition A, then do X, otherwise do Y.

He wrote down procedures that could be followed by anyone, anywhere, who knew how to read. The procedure did not depend on intuition or genius. It worked because the steps worked. That is exactly what an algorithm is. A finite, deterministic procedure for solving a problem. He did not just give us the word. He gave us the entire concept of programming a thousand years before there was anything to program.

When Alan Turing built the first abstract model of computation in 1936, when John von Neumann designed the first stored-program computer in 1945, when every engineer at Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, and DeepMind writes code in 2026, they are working in a paradigm that started with one man in Baghdad twelve centuries ago. The strangest part is what happens when you walk into any tech office in San Francisco or Bangalore or Lahore today. Engineers say the words algebra and algorithm hundreds of times a day. They do not know whose name they are saying. Almost nobody can spell al-Khwarizmi correctly on the first try. His original Arabic manuscript is preserved at Oxford. His book on Hindu numerals survives only in Latin translation. The Latin version was the textbook that taught medieval Europe how to count.

The man who built the foundation of the AI revolution did not live to see a calculator. He died around 850 CE, a thousand years before the first electric current was sent through a wire. The civilization he built mathematics for collapsed. The library he wrote in burned. His own grave is unmarked. But every algorithm running on every machine on Earth right now still answers to his name.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Conversation: While AI technology is new, information warfare is as old as conflict itself. For millennia, humans have used propaganda, deception and psychological operations to influence adversaries’ decision-making and morale. In the 13th century, for instance, the Mongols destroyed entire cities just so word of mouth would spread to the next, with the goal of breaking morale and forcing it to capitulate before troops even arrived. Watch Iran … Lego and rap

Academic rigour, journalistic flair

Arts + CultureBusiness + EconomyEducationEnvironmentHealthPolitics + SocietyScience + TechWorldPodcastsInsights

Share article

Print article

While AI technology is new, information warfare is as old as conflict itself. For millennia, humans have used propaganda, deception and psychological operations to influence adversaries’ decision-making and morale. In the 13th century, for instance, the Mongols destroyed entire cities just so word of mouth would spread to the next, with the goal of breaking morale and forcing it to capitulate before troops even arrived.

As technology has progressed, it has opened new frontiers in information warfare. From the Second World War to the 1991 Gulf War, planes dropped leaflets to spread rumours and propaganda. During the Vietnam War, English-language radio shows presented by Hanoi Hannah (real name Trịnh Thị Ngọ) taunted US troops with lists of their locations and casualties to lower morale. Radio propaganda also demonstrated its devastating effect when it was used to guide the Rwandan Genocide in 1994.

Cable TV came next. The 1991 Gulf War was the first major conflict broadcast on a 24 hour news cycle as opposed to the evening news. Instead of daily updates in bulletins or newspapers, people at home began receiving a continuous stream of information and images that was invariably biased towards national interests. This technological shift defined public perceptions of the war, and led historians to dub it the “CNN War”.

What we are witnessing today is the next step in this evolution – from print, radio and TV to social media. If the First Gulf War was the CNN war, the 2025 and 2026 conflict between the US, Israel and Iran can be thought of as the first TikTok War, and the first major AI War.

AI has ushered in new forms of information warfare that target perceptions, information environments, and trust itself. AI-generated videos in particular have fundamentally altered how states and non-state actors wage information warfare, manipulate populations, and compete not only in the Gulf, but in a global arena.

This “synthetic media” is frequently deployed and spread to falsify footage of real-world events – from devastating military attacks that never really happened to fake videos of officials pleading for a ceasefire.

But this technology also convincingly and easily creates propaganda material that is obviously fiction. The most notable example is Iran’s viral Lego videos that have repeatedly – and very successfully – mocked Israel and the US throughout the war.


Read more: Slopaganda wars: how (and why) the US and Iran are flooding the zone with viral AI-generated noise


Digital weapons

To fully understand the disruptive potential of AI videos, we can go back and look at the futurist speculation of dystopian science fiction novels. Science fiction author William Gibson coined the term “cyberspace” in his 1983 novel Neuromancer, describing it as a “consensual hallucination” – not reality, but rather a “graphic representation of data abstracted from banks of every computer in the human system”.

But when digital tools like AI videos and social media are used as weapons, the barrier between cyberspace and physical reality becomes permeable. They no longer create virtual reality, but what French media theorist Jean Baudrillard called “hyperreality”. This term describes a state in which the distinction between reality and a simulation of reality collapses, where the simulation feels “more real than real”.

Bauldrillard’s work is underpinned by the concept of “simulacra”: copies or representations of something that really exists. He classified simulacra in three orders. The first order is the pre-industrial counterfeit – a faithful copy or replica of a real object – while the second is the mechanically mass-produced object.

Third order simulacra are simulations, or signs with absolutely no physical form. Take Iran’s Lego videos, which depict scenes such as Trump and Netanyahu using the Iran War as a pretext to distract from the Epstein files while worshipping the pagan Canaanite deity Baal. They have nothing to do with the intentions of the Danish company that makes the ubiquitous plastic brick toys, and yet they have gained enormous traction as viral meme propaganda – both in the West and around the world.

AI is the message

Media theorist Marshall McLuhan’s oft-quoted phrase “the medium is the message” argues that, irrespective of the messages transmitted by media – be it newspaper, radio or TV – the medium in and of itself also tells us something.

The content of Iranian, US and Israeli AI videos are, naturally, entirely different, as each seeks to undermine their opponents’ narratives. But the medium of AI videos shared on social media also sends a message: these videos transcend an adversary’s borders in ways that previous media could not.

Unlike the pamphlets, radio broadcasts and TV networks of before, AI’s production and consumption are geographically unbound. Anyone can make and view it anywhere – whether in Tehran, Tel Aviv, Washington or anywhere else in the world. What this has created is a new era of borderless, decentralised, viral, digital public diplomacy.


Read more: Iran’s AI memes are reaching people who don’t follow the news – and winning the propaganda war


Deepfakes, propaganda and ‘truth decay’

Unlike Iran’s Lego videos, AI deepfakes are realistic but entirely fabricated content, making it difficult for viewers to discern truth from falsehood. Early iterations were crude and easily identifiable, but modern deepfakes have reached a level of photorealism and vocal authenticity that can deceive even experienced observers and automated detection systems.

During the so-called “12-Day War” in 2025 in Israel and Iran, AI deepfakes and video game footage sought to replicate real combat. Fabricated visuals included scenes of destroyed Israeli aircraft, collapsing buildings in Tel Aviv and its airport, while others showed Israeli strikes on Tehran that left a crater in an intersection and sent cars flying.

But believability isn’t always paramount. One widely-shared image of a downed Israeli F-35 fighter was taken from a flight simulator game. The plane was obviously too large compared to the bystanders on the ground, but this didn’t stop the image from going viral (it got 23 million views on TikTok) or from being spread by networks sympathetic to Russia seeking to demonstrate the vulnerability of American-made aircraft.

In total, the three most viewed deepfake videos during the 2025 war received 100 million views across social media. One deepfake video that circulated on Facebook even depicted Israeli officials pleading for the US to enforce a ceasefire, claiming “we cannot fight Iran any longer”.

This content was disseminated on TikTok, Telegram and X, where the AI chatbot Grok failed to identify fabricated videos that used footage from other conflicts.

Legal scholars have coined the phrases “liar’s dividend” and “truth decay” to characterise this ongoing trend towards fabricating reality. These terms refer to a media landscape where AI-driven fakes cast even legitimate evidence into doubt, eroding trust to the point where any image or medium can now be dismissed as a deepfake.

The most recent 2025 to 2026 wars demonstrate that, as states race to develop drones, missiles and defence systems, a parallel arms race is unfolding online. The digital revolution, coupled with advances in AI, has exponentially increased the speed, scale and sophistication of information manipulation. This conflict heralds a new era of information warfare, one where AI technologies are weaponised to influence, disrupt and destabilise adversaries.


A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The President of Iran a doctor

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Epstein…designer babies Zorro Ranch… FBI cover-up exposed : 60 Minutes

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Charlie Rose: Harvard Economist Ken Rogoff : Iran, Oil & the Global Economy. The Economic Impact: Iran, Oil, AI & Debt

Apr 24, 2026

A Charlie Rose Global Conversation: Ken Rogoff is a distinguished Professor of International Economics and Summa Cum Laude graduate of Yale, with a PhD in economics from MIT.

Perhaps more interesting to some is that he is a brilliant grandmaster chess champion who had an extraordinary career, winning the U.S. Junior Championship before deciding at 18 to excel in economics.

He served as chief economist at the International Monetary Fund. After teaching at Princeton, he is now the Maurits C. Boas Chair of International Economics at Harvard University. This is a moment to talk about global economics, as the war in Iran has caused huge swings in the price of oil, gasoline, and fertilizer.

We will talk about many things, including the Iran war, the control of the Strait of Hormuz, the regime in Iran, and President Trump.

Also the global economy, debt, the dollar, interest rates, the Federal Reserve, and the risks of artificial intelligence. I’m pleased to welcome back Ken Rogoff.Charlie Rose283K subscribers

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Psychology Today: 3 Ways to Support Your Highly Sensitive Child

Highly Sensitive Person

3 Ways to Support Your Highly Sensitive Child

How parents can facilitate their hypersensitive children’s happiness.

Posted April 23, 2026 |  Reviewed by Lybi Ma

 Xavier Mouton Photographie / Unsplash

Source: Xavier Mouton Photographie / Unsplash

Highly sensitive children are often deeply perceptive, emotionally tuned in, and easily overwhelmed. They are not “problem children” to be fixed but temperamentally unique individuals who thrive (or struggle) depending on how environments and caregivers respond to them.

Scientific research shows that this sensitivity isn’t just a parenting buzzword: it’s a measurable individual difference (often referred to as environmental and sensory sensitivity), and it shapes how children respond to both supportive and stressful influences in their environment.

Here are three evidence-based ways to support your highly sensitive child.

1. Highly Sensitive Kids Thrive on Support That Builds Emotional Security

One of the most consistent findings in developmental science is that sensitive children are especially affected by the quality of caregiving they receive, for better and for worse.

In a large longitudinal study published in Development and Psychopathology, researchers followed more than 600 children aged 9 to 12 and found that children with higher environmental sensitivity benefited most from supportive parenting. Those who perceived their parents as less supportive were more likely to develop attachment vulnerabilities and internalizing problems like anxiety.

This research builds on a broader empirical framework showing that sensitive children process social cues and emotional context more deeply than peers, which can translate into heightened responsiveness to caregivers’ warmth and consistency.

To put this into practice, here are the first few steps you can follow:

  • Tune in before you respond. Reflective listening, which is the practice of naming what your child feels (“It sounds like that was really overwhelming”), helps them feel understood and less alone.
  • Be predictable and available. Routines and consistent responses help your child feel safe enough to explore their world.
  • Respond to distress with presence over problem-solving. Sometimes, emotional connection matters more than fixing the issue.

Sensitive children aren’t needy; they’re unusually responsive. Your responsiveness gives them a secure base from which to grow.

2. Highly Sensitive Kids Build Emotional Regulation Through Co-Regulation

Highly sensitive children tend to experience emotions intensely and may struggle with emotional regulation. This isn’t because they can’t regulate, but rather because their processing depth and reactivity are higher.

article continues after advertisement

https://c858fff25b2b02e4af38359f35fbcc0d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.html

Research linking early sensitivity with later tendencies toward rumination and depressive symptoms highlights that, in the absence of supportive coping environments, these children are at risk of internalizing distress. For instance, in a 2022 longitudinal study in European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, researchers found that when highly sensitive children rated highly experienced permissive parenting, they developed greater rumination, a cognitive style linked to depression, compared with those in more structured environments.

THE BASICS

The key takeaway from the science is that pre-verbal regulation support and co-regulation, combined with intentional emotional coaching, help sensitive children learn to manage intense feelings over time.

Here are some evidence-inspired strategies you can begin working with:

  • Label and mirror emotions. Rather than dismissing intense reactions (“it isn’t so bad”), say what you observe. For instance, “I see how upset you are, that sounds really hard.”
  • Co-regulate before you ask them to self-regulateUse calm grounding techniques together, such as deep breathing, quiet walks, or soft music, before expecting them to manage independently.
  • Support problem-solving when calm. Once emotions settle, ask gentle questions like, “What do you think might help next time?”

Parent-child co-regulation teaches emotional language and coping skills rooted in connection, not control.

3. Highly Sensitive Kids Need Calm, Predictable Settings

At a basic level, environmental sensitivity reflects physiological and psychological responsiveness to external stimuli. These include lights, sounds, emotional reactivity, textures, transitions, and social contexts. According to 2023 research on sensory processing sensitivity, children with high sensitivity are more easily overstimulated than those with lower sensitivity. For this reason, they will benefit more from calm, supportive environments.

It’s important to note that creating a predictable, sensory-friendly space for your child doesn’t mean that you’re “coddling” or “spoiling” them. In reality, it’s akin to building a scaffolding that your child can use to engage with challenges without becoming overwhelmed.

Some science-guided ways that can shape your environment to set your highly sensitive child up for success include:

  • Routine anchors. Predictable daily rhythms such as morning routines, wind-down signals, and mealtime rituals reduce cognitive load and support emotional regulation.
  • Controlled sensory exposure. When environmental stimuli are intense, you can offer respite spaces by temporarily moving them to a quiet room, lowering the lighting intensity, or even providing a weighted blanket or noise-cancelling headphones.
  • Advance notice of transitions. Sensitive children process change more deeply. Giving a “heads up” before transitions (“In ten minutes we’re leaving for school”) helps them prepare mentally.

article continues after advertisement

https://c858fff25b2b02e4af38359f35fbcc0d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.html

These strategies aren’t about limiting experiences. Instead, they provide a buffer of stability so sensitive children can fully benefit from positive stimuli and manage negative ones.

Why Highly Sensitive Children Benefit So Strongly From Supportive Contexts

The research converges on one clear pattern: environmental sensitivity functions as an amplifier of experience.

Sensitive children are more reactive to negative environments and more responsive to positive ones. This has sometimes been called differential susceptibility, meaning that sensitive children are disproportionately affected by both adverse and nurturing conditions.

This doesn’t imply fragility but responsiveness: the very trait that makes these children thoughtful, observant, creative, and compassionate can also intensify stress when unmet by supportive environments and intensify growth when well-supported.

In practice, this means:

  • Supportive parenting matters more for sensitive children than for less sensitive ones
  • Emotional skills taught with connection are internalized more deeply and last longer
  • Structured environments reduce overwhelm and support engagement

When parents understand why their sensitive child reacts strongly, they can move from frustration to strategy. Over time, these strategies help highly sensitive children learn that their sensitivity is not a liability or a weakness but a strength that can fuel deep empathy, creativity, and resilience when nurtured minds are paired with reliable support.

A version of this post also appears on Forbes.com.

article continues after advertisement

https://c858fff25b2b02e4af38359f35fbcc0d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.html

Share this post

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Big Think. How to actually stop caring… Is happiness overrated?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Axios: Gen Z powers digital detox surge

Gen Z powers digital detox surge
 
A phone is locked into a Yondr pouch at New York City’s Brooklyn Museum. Photo: Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images

Phone-free bars, restaurants and entertainment experiences are on the rise while cellphone pouches are becoming an essential item at schools, weddings, proms and retreats, Axios’ Rebecca Falconer writes.

The surprise powerhouse behind thedigital detox movement: grassroots efforts among Gen Zers to switch off their phones.

By the numbers: 47% of those under 30 said they are striving to reduce screen time, compared with 32% of older Americans, a YouGov survey found.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment