for so long we hit a ceiling on what these specs meant in practice and very recently maxing them suddenly produces very useful leverage

M4 Max, 128 GB. Lovely bit of power

(a) the press implying 10 minutes of AI use will erode thinking is really misrepresenting our study and we never advocate for that lanaguage. It is not the author’s fault that the press is doing weird writeups about our study which we don’t endorse!

I got a Mac Studio on the hunch that it would be cool play with local models, and it is but what I didn't expect is that it's just great to have shit loads of RAM and cores for building multiple things in parallel. and even cooler to use it remotely for this task

low key I‘ve been thinking Opus 5.5 is an Opus 4.5-level jump in practicality and accessibility. I’m a little surprised not to be hearing more people talk about this, but I guess it’s been less than three weeks. I expect to see a wave of non-programmers finding new use cases for agents

Study: it’s time to inspect your wallet for AI infiltration. If you don’t use AI you’re 8x more likely to be safe, but let’s just be sure. Log into your bank here… 💬 233 ♻️ 38.4K ❤️ 304.7K

Study: AI use harms your brain. Our measures and methods are definitely airtight. You don’t need to look at them very closely. I mean, you’re so handsome, so discerning. Because you don’t use AI. And everyone who does? Brain damaged. Just take our word for it. 💬 233 ♻️ 38.4K ❤️ 304.7K

Ok I've run through my copy of this study and I have another observation which is that besides mental effort it takes a significantly greater amount of time to sit there and solve 14 fraction problems even when they're easy. Time cost alone changes demand.

The fact is our targets are often bad. Parsimonious, limited, defined according to some human textbook version of a disease that we want to have a clean definition instead of from the messy reality of the world. The entire way we think about disease and design for studying it is really outdated.

People just think science is bigger than it is because science has such unreal outcomes for our lives. There just aren't enough scientists, there isn't enough funding, there isn't enough time and there isn't enough resource for our needs. People think their countries fund it much more than they do

Whole diseases aren't studied. In my experience reading about rare and orphan diseases (I was misdx'd with one for about a year and you better believe I read every published paper on it which wasn't much) whole groups of people out here with treatments we're just guessing at that no one even studies

I reanalyzed the CDC data behind the LGB “free fall” headline. It rests on a change in bisexual identification among one grade, in one wave, of one survey. Gay or lesbian identification did not change significantly. Calling it a "free fall" is sensational and just gives bad actors talking points.

my radical opinion is that cancer is bad, and that anyone who is less than an anti-cancer extremist is also bad. this has become shockingly polarizing

nobody respects trump supporters, least of all trump

thank youuuuuu (both)

it's that unfolding animation that finally filled that gaping hole in my soul actually

yeah look at that shit, that’s gonna heal something