Bryan Johnson (Image source: Wikipedia)

Social media is a big part of our daily lives now. Smartphones keep getting notifications, timelines never stop refreshing, and short videos are always trying to get your attention. Even though these platforms are supposed to connect people, researchers and technologists are starting to wonder how being on them all the time affects the brain, attention span, and long-term mental health. Over the past few years, the idea of a “digital detox” has gone from being talked about on wellness blogs to being seriously discussed in the fields of technology and neuroscience.Tech entrepreneur Bryan Johnson is one of the most recent people to bring this topic back into the spotlight. Known for his work in technology and longevity research, Johnson shared a detailed post on X (formerly Twitter) describing his experience after stepping away from social media.The post attracted attention because it framed social media use not as a moral issue, but as a technical and biological one. Johnson explained how modern platforms are built to keep people interested by using reward loops, notifications, and personalised feeds. According to him, these systems interact directly with human neurochemistry, shaping behaviour in subtle but powerful ways.Johnson’s message was more about personal awareness and choice than about asking for rules or bans. He said that taking a break from social media is like resetting your brain, just like cutting back on sugar resets your taste buds. His story adds to the growing conversation about how digital tools affect the brain and why taking a break, even for a short time, can help you focus in a world where you are always connected.

Bryan Johnson completed a 40-hour social media fast

In his post published on X, Bryan Johnson explained that after removing social media from his daily routine, he noticed clear changes in how his mind worked. He stated that his thinking became calmer, his ability to focus improved, and his emotional reactions felt less intense over time.Johnson pointed out that social media platforms are built using advanced technology designed to capture attention. These systems use algorithms, notifications, and endless scrolling to keep users engaged for as long as possible. He said that taking a break from these systems helped his brain recover from being constantly stimulated.

The technology behind social media addiction

Machine learning algorithms that look at how people use social media in real time are used by most modern sites. Every like, pause, share, or scroll feeds data back into the system. This data is then used to refine what content appears next.Technology researchers have long noted that these platforms operate on variable reward systems, similar to those used in gaming. Users do not know which post will be interesting or rewarding, so they keep scrolling. Over time, this can teach the brain to always look for new things to do.Instead of blaming users, Johnson’s post focuses on this technical design. He says that being around these kinds of systems for a long time can make it harder to control your attention and make it hard to do quiet, focused work.

What a social media detox means in a tech context

A social media detox doesn’t mean you have to stop using all technology. Instead, it means taking away or limiting access to platforms that depend on loops of continuous engagement.From a technical point of view, this lowers the risk of:

By lowering these inputs, the brain gets fewer quick signals, which lets natural attention rhythms come back.

Why Johnson links detox to brain performance

Johnson said that taking a break from social media helped him get back to what he called “baseline mental clarity.” Tasks required less effort, and emotional responses became more stable when there were no constant interruptions.His observations are in line with other research in cognitive science that shows that switching tasks often and getting notifications can make working memory worse. Johnson’s post is personal, but it agrees with what digital behaviour studies have found about how technology affects thinking.

Is Texas Becoming ‘New Delhi’? Social Media Fight Erupts Over Indian Presence

A seemingly off-hand social media exchange this week has drawn attention and criticism for highlighting deep tensions around immigration, demographic change and cultural identity in the United States. Academic and commentator Wilfred Reilly retweeted a post asserting “Texas is 1% Indian,” responding to Korean content creator Kangmin Lee, who had observed that many passengers on his flight to Dallas and numerous people at the airport appeared to be of Indian origin. That reply tapped into fast-moving online debates about ethnic presence, belonging and who gets to define an “authentic America.”

What really happened?

Taking to his social media handle on X (formerly Twitter), Kangmin Lee posted early Thursday morning, “Just flew into Dallas, over half of my flight was Indian and every other person at the airport is Indian. Am I in Texas or New Delhi? What is going in Dallas? (sic).” Retweeting the unnecessary hate, Wilfred Reilly defended, “Texas is 1% Indian and you yourself seem to be a legal immigrant of Korean descent (sic)” to which Kangmin replied, “And? Is it wrong to not want parts of America to look like entire foreign countries? (sic).”What followed was a heated exchange in the comments section with some amplifying the hate against Indians while some defending it but the context for this exchange is a much larger viral conversation about Indian-American visibility in parts of Texas, especially in the Dallas–Fort Worth (DFW) metro area, where Indians form one of the fastest-growing immigrant communities. According to demographic data, the DFW area is home to more than 235,000 Indian Americans, roughly 3 percent of the total population, with concentrations in suburbs like Plano, Frisco and Lewisville where Indian-run businesses, cultural centers and communities have flourished over recent decades. What began as light-hearted footage in some viral videos showing Indian grocery stores and eateries has repeatedly been reframed by some commentators as evidence that the cultural landscape in parts of Texas is changing “too fast.” In one notable case last year, a viral clip of Ganesh Chaturthi celebrations outside a Dallas area Indian bazaar was repurposed by critics to support claims that Indian customs and immigration were overwhelming local culture — even though many viewed the celebration as a typical cultural festival among diaspora communities.

Social media reaction to the Korean content creator’s tweet, stereotypes against Indians and the US politics of belonging

Online reactions to these tweets and videos have split sharply. Some users greeted Kangmin Lee’s remark with amusement or identification, noting that ethnic diversity is increasingly visible in American cities, especially in tech and university-linked communities. Others, including some fringe commentators and MAGA-aligned activists, seized on the topic to amplify a narrative of “invasion” or cultural takeover.Recently, a Texas-based conservative commentator blasted a 90-foot Hanuman statue at a Hindu temple as evidence of a supposed “invasion” by “third world aliens,” echoing similar rhetoric about Indians “taking over” Texas towns.

X (formerly Twitter) users react to Korean content creator’s dig at Indians in the US.

Critics of this framing argue it feeds into xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment, pointing out that demographic change and multiculturalism are longstanding features of American society. Indeed, debates about H-1B visas, a work-related immigration category under fire in US politics, often surface in these discussions, with some voices blaming foreign professionals for perceived economic strain on local workers even as economists stress that tech and skilled sectors sorely rely on global talent.Experts and diaspora commentators warn that what might start as commentary on community growth can quickly morph into divisive rhetoric if stripped of context. A recent interview with Sree Sreenivasan, a senior Indian-American digital strategist, cautioned that “anti-Indian hate going on right now in the US” is an example of how broader anxieties about economics and security can play out as targeting of immigrants on social media.

Texas in US as a microcosm of broader identity debates

Texas, with its rich history of immigration and cultural blending, once part of Mexico and now a mosaic of Latin, Asian, African and European heritages, has often been at the center of broader national debates over identity and demographic shifts are real. Many Indian Americans in the DFW area work in sectors like information technology, engineering and medicine, forming vibrant, tightly knit communities with their own cultural, commercial and civic institutions.

X (formerly Twitter) users react to Korean content creator’s dig at Indians in the US.

However, social media commentary such as Lee’s tweet and Reilly’s reply show how sensitive such topics can be, especially when wrapped in provocative language or broad generalisations. Some argue that pointing out a community’s visibility is simply observation; others see such statements as feeding into fear-based identity politics that can escalate into xenophobia or stigma. Analysts note that while discussions about immigration are legitimate in democratic discourse, they must be handled with nuance and awareness of how marginalized groups can be affected by sweeping generalizations.

Bottom line

An exchange between Wilfred Reilly and Kangmin Lee on X sparked debate about Indian visibility in Texas, touching on sensitive topics of immigration and cultural change. The Dallas–Fort Worth area has a substantial Indian-American population, contributing to its multicultural character and economic growth. Some social media users and commentators have framed such demographic presence in alarmist terms, linking it to debates over H-1B visas and cultural identity. Analysts warn that online discussions can amplify divisive narratives and promoting context, empathy and accurate data is key to constructive discourse about immigration and community dynamics.

Elon Musk (Image source: Reuters)

Success stories around global business leaders often focus on money, innovation, or intelligence. In the case of Elon Musk, the billionaire behind companies like Tesla and SpaceX, much has been written about his work ethic and ambition. However, one of the most direct insights into how he approaches success came not from Musk himself, but from someone who knew him long before global fame followed. That insight came from Justine Musk, his former wife and a published author.In a widely discussed public talk and later interviews, Justine Musk described a single habit she believes played a crucial role in Elon Musk’s rise. It was not a technical skill, access to capital, or luck. Instead, she spoke about his repeated and deliberate use of one word: “NO.” According to her, this word helped him protect his time, energy, and focus at every stage of his career.

Justine Musk revealed Elon Musk’s secret word for success

Justine Musk spoke about Elon Musk’s approach to success during a TEDx talk titled “The Obsessive Genius”, delivered at TEDxOlympicBlvdWomen. In this talk, she explained how he consistently used the word “no” to protect his goals.As per reports, she said that Elon Musk was very clear about what he wanted to do. He didn’t hesitate to say “no” to requests, distractions, or demands that didn’t fit with those goals. She explained that this behaviour was not about arrogance but about focus.

Why saying “no” mattered so much

According to Justine Musk, the habit of saying “no” allowed Elon Musk to avoid being pulled in too many directions. As his responsibilities grew, so did the number of demands on his attention. She noted that many people fail not because they lack ability, but because they say yes too often.By refusing commitments that did not serve his long-term objectives, Musk was able to concentrate deeply on fewer things. This made him fully commit to hard projects that took a lot of time and effort.This explanation doesn’t say that it’s easy or socially acceptable to say “no.” Instead, it shows how hard choices about time and focus can affect professional results for a long time.

How this insight became public

Justine Musk first talked about this point of view in public during her TEDx talk, which is still available on TED’s official sites. In later interviews and essays about ambition, relationships, and power dynamics, she talked more about similar ideas.There was no advice or instruction in what she said. They were framed as personal observations based on what they had seen and done. Over time, these comments were used in news stories and articles about leadership.

Pakistan’s Babar Azam during a practice session ahead of an ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2026 cricket match between India and Pakistan, at R Premadasa Stadium, in Colombo, Sri Lanka. (PTI Photo)

Pakistan batter Babar Azam drew fresh online criticism during his team’s Group A match against Namibia national cricket team at the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2026 in Colombo after he did not get a chance to bat. The experienced batter, long seen as one of Pakistan’s leading run-scorers, has struggled for form in the competition. On X and other platforms, fans have questioned why he has not made an impact, even when opportunities might have arisen earlier in the tournament.The 31-year-old had originally been picked as a fail-safe option. He was expected to anchor the innings at number four and steady the side if wickets fell, an area where Pakistan have faced problems in the past.However, against the Netherlands and India, he did not play that role effectively when Pakistan’s batting collapsed. In the must-win game against Namibia, Pakistan made a strong start, and team management — including coach Mike Hesson and captain Salman Ali Agha — chose to send more aggressive batters ahead of him.Pakistan lost their second wicket, that of skipper Agha, in the 13th over. Instead of sending Babar at number four, Khawaja Nafay was promoted. Even after Nafay managed only 5 off 5 balls, Babar was still not sent in. Shadab Khan joined Sahibzada Farhan in the middle instead.Online reaction was swift, with users posting memes, questions and criticism about his lack of runs and Pakistan’s batting approach.“Babar Azam ko team puri krny ke liay khilaya gaya hai?” asked one viewer.Another user edited a well-known “depression mein hain” video using Babar’s voice after his demotion.A third user wrote on X, “I think babar azam is promoted as finisher.”In the match, Pakistan rode on Sahibzada Farhan’s scintillating, maiden hundred and their spinners’ excellent display to beat Namibia by a handsome margin of 102 runs and enter the Super Eights of the T20 World Cup on Wednesday.

Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin (File photo)

NEW DELHI: Tamil Nadu on Wednesday pitched for greater federalism, with the state assembly tabling the Justice Kurian Joseph Committee report on Centre-state relations that recommended diminished powers for the governor and a greater role for states in constitutional amendments.In Part-1 of the report, which runs into 387 pages, the three-member panel said for the appointment of state governors, Article 155 of the Constitution should be amended “to bind the President to appoint one of the three names approved by a majority of the state assembly”. It recommended a non-renewable five-year term for governors and proposed they be barred from holding any further constitutional office except that of the President and the vice-president.CM MK Stalin called for constitutional amendments and structural reforms to decentralise powers and provide greater autonomy to states. “How long should we remain the receiver and the Union the provider?” he said.Governors should not hold office in a political party or any office of the executive, legislature or judiciary in the five years preceding appointment, the report said. It also sought amendments to impose timelines for gubernatorial and presidential action on bills, with deemed assent on expiry, citing the framework laid down by Supreme Court in April 2025.The committee recommended doing away with the governor’s address at the start of an assembly session and divesting the governor of the statutory role of chancellor of state universities. “Dissolution (of the legislative assembly) shall be ordered solely on ministerial advice,” it suggested.The panel sought a larger say for states in elections, education, health, delimitation and GST. The report slammed the three-language formula and suggested the country shift from “weak trilingualism to high-proficiency bilingualism”. It said India must abandon the “one nation one language” policy and urged Union govt to correct Census distortions by ending misclassification of 53 languages as dialects of Hindi.On territorial integrity, the panel said the consent of the affected state legislature should be obtained before the President recommends introducing a bill to create a new state, and that the same principle should apply to altering the area, boundaries or name of a state.The report said the “one nation, one election” proposal should be withdrawn as it violates the basic structure of the Constitution. It proposed limiting EC’s role to elections for Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, President, Vice-President and Union Territories, while independent state election commissions conduct polls to state legislatures and local bodies.