Should be pointed out that this is a critique of common popsci journalism tropes and not a fancy new research result. Anyone who has taken a graduate level class in General Relativity would have been able to tell you the same.

As is nicely visualised by it's Penrose Diagram, e.g.

https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/penrose_schw.gif

Contains 08 rendered frames of a free falling observer's view while crossing the event horizon. This is not reddit, but plz someone animate it :}

what's really going to blow your mind is

while you probably assumed or knew spinning black holes move space around them

spinning black holes also move TIME around them

* https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ady9068

so in theory a spinning black hole that's been around for billions of years has a time drag around it in a path that is billions of years old

(no we can't navigate it because yes that would be time travel to the past and violates causality)

black holes are just so weird with every new detail even more weird

oddly more interesting to me to try to grasp neutron stars (densest objects before black holes and are still visible, our entire solar system in a neutron star would be only 10km 6.2miles across)

Interesting work. The idea that the singularity is a surface rather than a point was unexpected to me even though it seems to follow logically from the theory of relativity. I wonder how this reconciles with quantum gravity. If the singularity is truly a two-dimensional surface, perhaps it's related to Hawking radiation and the thermodynamics of black holes?

How does one descr blackhole to a non-physicist without losing much accuracy? I just it of a very-dense-object.

Well... yeah? That's describing the event horizon. It's a term roughly as widely used as "singularity".

Talking about the inside of a black hole is indeed rather pop-misunderstood though, yes. But it's not like physicists are especially confident about the details either. Theoretical astrophysics changes a lot as time goes on and our instruments improve, and it's a rather hard field to do experiments on to get better data quicker.

Isn't that how we're inside one.