First brain scans of ChatGPT users proves AI is eroding memory and critical thinking. Over four months, researchers tracked the brain activity of 54 students and found those who regularly relied on AI for writing showed lower memory retention and reduced critical thinking skills, as measured by EEG brain scans. These users also produced less original content and had difficulty recalling their own work shortly after completion—a pattern researchers described as “mental passivity.” The study, titled The Cognitive Cost of Using LLMs, highlights a key concern: AI-generated convenience may come at the expense of mental engagement. Students who started without AI and then transitioned to using tools like ChatGPT showed increased brain activity, suggesting that AI is most beneficial when it enhances, rather than replaces, the thinking process. Researchers also warned of echo chambers forming when users passively accept algorithmic answers without scrutiny. The findings point to a clear takeaway — AI can be a valuable tool, but only if we remain active participants in the process. #AIandEducation #CriticalThinking #MemoryLoss #ChatGPTStudy #AIEthics #MentalHealthInTech #LearningWithAI #FutureOfLearning #DigitalWellbeing #CognitiveScience #TechAwareness

Australia has unveiled a bionic eye system that sends visual signals directly to the brain—giving hope to those suffering from total blindness. The system includes a camera-equipped eyeglass, a wearable processor, and an implant that bypasses the optic nerve to connect to the brain’s vision center. Initial trials have shown users recognizing shapes, lights, and even limited movement. While still under clinical development, the bionic eye marks a new era of neuroprosthetics, where vision loss may one day be fully reversible. #BionicEye #VisionRestoration #AustraliaInnovation #Neuroprosthetics #BlindHope #michanicalmind

🧠☠️ The Brain-Eating Amoeba Is Back — and It’s Coming Through Your Tap Water 🚿⚠️ Naegleria fowleri — a rare but deadly microscopic killer — has been found spreading through U.S. tap water, entering the body through the nose during sinus rinsing and swimming. It doesn’t harm you if you swallow it. But if it enters through your nose, it travels straight to your brain — causing a fatal infection in days. 💧 Neti pot users: only use sterile, distilled, or previously boiled water. Don’t let this silent killer into your head. Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Without This Man, Google Would Never Have Worked. His name is not on a Forbes list. He didn’t found a trillion-dollar company. And he never wore a turtleneck on a keynote stage. But every time you type, search, copy, paste, or click, you are using something he created. Without this man, Google would never have worked. In fact, most of modern computing — as we know it — wouldn’t exist. His name is Larry Tesler. And though you’ve likely never heard of him… Your entire digital life runs on his ideas. Let me take you back. In the 1960s, computers were monstrous machines locked away in labs — built for engineers, scientists, and military research. They were confusing. Cold. Command-line based. If you wanted to use one, you had to memorize strange codes, wait for long responses, and operate in a system that made you feel small and stupid. Back then, computers weren’t designed for humans. They were designed for machines. But Larry Tesler didn’t agree. He believed that computing shouldn’t be difficult. He believed that technology should work for people — not the other way around. And so, for decades, he waged a quiet revolution. Not with speeches or startups… But with code. At Xerox PARC, in the 1970s, Larry Tesler helped develop some of the most important ideas in computer history: He championed the concept of a graphical user interface — a system where you could click, scroll, and interact with icons rather than type in commands. He invented the cut, copy, and paste functions — giving users the power to move digital content with simple clicks. (Yes. The same CTRL+C / CTRL+V you use every single day.) He introduced the principle of "modeless computing" — a vision that computers should be intuitive and simple, without forcing users to think like machines. These small-seeming ideas are the reason your smartphone is easy to use. They are why an 8-year-old and an 80-year-old can both browse the internet without a manual. And they laid the foundation for the modern user-friendly interface. Now, here’s the twist… Tesler didn’t build empires. He didn’t sell stock or chase unicorn valuations. He just kept building. Quietly. Brilliantly. He worked at Apple, where he helped Steve Jobs integrate user-friendly features into the first Macintosh. He also worked at Amazon and Yahoo!, helping shape their user experiences in the early 2000s. But his name never went viral. His face never became iconic. He never tried to be famous. And when he passed away in 2020, most of the world didn’t even notice. But here’s what makes him unforgettable: When you copy a sentence… Paste a link… Use your phone… Search Google… Switch between apps… Use drag-and-drop… You're using Tesler’s fingerprints. Every time. Every day. Everywhere. As I complete this article and read through again, I personally noted as follows: Some people build things. Others shape how the world uses them. Larry Tesler did both — quietly. He didn’t chase power. He chased simplicity. He didn’t want the spotlight. He wanted usability. And in doing so, he became the invisible architect of modern computing. So the next time you CTRL+C or CTRL+V… Pause. And whisper a thank you to the man who believed technology should feel human. #TechHeroes #LarryTesler #CopyPasteKing #UnsungInnovators #UserFirst #DigitalLegacy Kachi Ogbonna

In 2022, Google quietly wired Apple a mind-blowing $20 billion. There was no scandal. No lawsuit. No broken systems. Just one of the most strategic, low-key deals in the history of tech. And yet, most people don’t even know it happened. All Google wanted was one thing—to remain the default search engine on every iPhone, iPad, and MacBook around the world. That’s it. One slot. One silent placement that gave Google access to more than half the world’s mobile traffic. That deal, that little setting most users never even change, fuels over a third of Google’s mobile ad revenue. Because when you open Safari and search something, it’s Google that serves the result. And Apple? Well, they collect a massive cut of that cash. Back in 2014, this deal was just $1 billion. But as the stakes rose and iPhones spread across the globe, the price tag climbed with them. Fast forward a few years, and Google is paying Apple between $18 to $20 billion every single year. That’s not just pocket change—that’s more than the GDP of some countries. Behind the scenes, this partnership is so valuable that Google considers losing it a “Code Red” event. They literally have internal crisis drills in case Apple ever walks away. On the flip side, Apple makes so much from this single partnership that some say it covers nearly 20% of its operating income. What makes it even more fascinating is that Apple doesn’t even offer its own search engine. And despite being tech rivals in public, Apple continues to call Google the “best search engine” while raking in billions. When Microsoft tried to get in on the deal, offering Apple 90% of Bing ad revenue, Apple didn’t even flinch. They stayed with Google. Not because they love them. But because the deal works—and it's invisible to most users. This quiet alliance isn’t just lucrative—it’s also controversial. U.S. regulators have opened antitrust lawsuits over this deal, arguing that it locks out competition and gives Google unfair dominance. But while the courts argue, the checks keep clearing. For entrepreneurs and founders, this story holds powerful lessons. Google didn’t pay for ads. They paid for position. And that position—being the default—unlocked one of the most valuable revenue streams in modern tech. Sometimes in business, the best seat at the table is not the loudest one. It’s the one people overlook. It’s the one baked into habit. It also shows that traffic is the new gold. Not the app. Not the content. But the ability to direct and control where attention flows. Apple could have built their own search engine. But they didn’t need to. Letting someone else win—while getting paid billions—is a different kind of power. We often think business success comes from being loud, innovative, or disruptive. But sometimes, the real power lies in quiet control. In unseen agreements. In being the one who decides what happens next—not necessarily the one who builds it. And so, two of the biggest tech giants, who seem like enemies on the surface, are actually tied together in one of the smartest, most profitable deals ever made. It’s a silent alliance. A strategic position. And a masterclass in how power really works in the modern world. Let it sink in: Google pays Apple billions… just to stay in your search bar. That’s the level of positioning every entrepreneur should aim for. Not just to be seen—but to be default. It does appear there is a pawn in this game. Can you guess who it is? #GoogleAppleDeal #TechStrategy #AntitrustRealities #DefaultPosition #TrafficMonopoly #DigitalPowerPlays #BusinessLessons #StartupWisdom #PlatformThinking #EntrepreneurMindset Kachi Ogbonna

In 1998, Yahoo made the most expensive mistake in corporate history. Two kids begged them to buy their tiny website for $1m. But Yahoo’s CEO called it "a waste of time". 11 years later, those kids wiped Yahoo off the internet. Here’s the shocking story of Yahoo's downfall. 1994, Yahoo started as a college project I A website built to help people find information online. By 1996, it became the largest online platform at a $33.8M valuation. They had the users, the hype, and the cash. But cracks were forming… Then in 1998, two Stanford students, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, built a revolutionary search engine. Their algorithm made Yahoo’s search look ancient. Unlike Yahoo’s directory-style listings, where human editors manually organized websites, These guys built something different. Their secret sauce? PageRank. Instead of just matching keywords, their algorithm ranked websites based on how many other sites linked to them, like academic citations. The more links a site had, especially from other credible pages, the higher it ranked. The result? Faster, smarter, more relevant search results. They named it Google. And when they offered to sell it to Yahoo for just $1 million, Yahoo laughed. “Search isn’t our focus,” they said. They had no idea that tiny algorithm would become their executioner. They turned it down, saying it wasn’t “worth their time.” But instead of killing the idea completely, Yahoo made the worst business decision in tech history They plugged Google search into Yahoo’s homepage. Their thinking? "Let users still come to Yahoo, but let Google handle the search behind the scenes." Smart in the short term. A catastrophe in the long run. Because here’s what happened: People LOVED Google It was fast, simple, and accurate, everything Yahoo search wasn’t. So each time someone used Yahoo, they were unknowingly falling in love with Google. Yahoo gave Google the exposure it needed to explode. And explode it did. Suddenly, Yahoo panicked. They came crawling back and offered to buy Google for $3 billion. But Google said, “Nah. We’re worth $5B now.” Yahoo laughed… and walked away again. Another trillion-dollar blunder, served cold with ego and regret. Still in denial, Yahoo doubled down. They decided to build their own walled ecosystem. They launched platforms for news, sports, shopping, and finance. They didn’t want to send users out, they wanted to keep them in. All in the name of ad revenue. Meanwhile, the internet exploded. Websites multiplied like wildfire. And Yahoo’s outdated, slow search system couldn’t keep up. So users did what users always do when something sucks: They left. They went to Google, where the search was smarter, cleaner, lightning-fast. No clutter. No noise. Just results. And then… Google played its masterstroke: AdWords. A genius idea: Businesses could bid to show up on Google search but only pay if someone clicks. Ads that felt natural. Relevant. Contextual. Every single search became a money machine. Google was printing cash. Advertisers loved it. Users didn’t mind it. Google didn’t just win search. They turned it into a business empire. While Yahoo? They were busy shopping. Buy every Tech. Company to remain relevant $5.7B for Broadcast com. $1.1B for Tumblr. Billions poured into acquisitions, most of them flops. They weren’t innovating. They were trying to buy relevance. But Google kept building: Gmail. Maps. Android. YouTube. Chrome. Every product was a hit. Every move, strategic. User-first. By 2009, Yahoo had had enough. They gave up on search completely. Handed it over to Microsoft. Let Bing take the wheel. Yes, Yahoo literally gave its core product to a competitor. That was the beginning of the end. In 2016, Yahoo was sold to Verizon for just $4.48 billion. A sad fall from a $125B peak. Once a titan. Now a tech ghost. So what really went wrong? Google had vision. They took bold bets. Focused on people. Played the long game. Yahoo was scattered. Short-sighted. Chasing quick wins and shiny distractions. In the end, Google didn’t just outperform Yahoo. They buried them. Because sometimes, playing it safe is the most dangerous move of all. Yahoo had the chance to buy Google twice. But they said no. And it cost them everything. So what can we learn from Yahoo’s downfall? Plenty. Here are the cold, hard lessons: - Never ignore innovation because it’s “too small.” That tiny idea you call a “waste of time” today could be your biggest threat tomorrow. - If you don't serve your users, someone else will. Yahoo chased ads. Google chased users. Guess who won? - Don’t fear disruption, own it. Yahoo was too comfortable. Too focused on preserving the old. Google rewrote the rules and owned the future. - Exposure is power. Yahoo thought they were “helping” Google by showing their results. They were unknowingly building their rival's brand on their own homepage. - You can’t outspend strategy. Yahoo thought buying companies was the answer. But real dominance is built, not bought. - Simplicity scales. While Yahoo was cluttered with portals and ads, Google kept it clean. Sometimes the simplest product wins. - Vision > Vanity. Google had a long-term vision. Yahoo wanted to look big fast. The difference? One is still around. The other is a tech relic. In business, it’s not about who starts first. It’s about who adapts, who listens, and who leads. Yahoo had the throne. But they gave it away twice. So remember this: The most expensive mistake in business isn’t doing the wrong thing. It’s ignoring the right one. #google #Yahoo #TechStories Tech Stories Ifeanyi Christopher

#CNBC Facebook, now called Meta, acquired WhatsApp for a historic $19 billion in 2014. Today, over half of the world’s internet users also use WhatsApp, but the free messaging service has never generated much revenue. Now though, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says that he views WhatsApp as Meta’s “next chapter” when it comes to monetization. CNBC spoke with WhatsApp Head of Product Alice Newton-Rex, who said that WhatsApp’s emerging business messaging services will drive revenue growth, as companies pay a fee to interact with customers on the platform. But it remains to be seen whether business messaging through WhatsApp will take off, as the current market is dominated by regular SMS messaging. And that future is especially unclear in the U.S., where WhatsApp has struggled to gain traction.