Dmitri Kudryashov

Please retweet! We invite applications for NIH-funded job opportunities in #KudryashovLab from enthusiastic biochemists, biophysicists, cell & structural biologists. Knowledge of the actin cytoskeleton is a plus. Passion for scientific research is a must.

Know someone who should be on an Editorial Board? Send them this 👇 #Cytoskeleton is recruiting (Assoc Prof+) Apply by Apr 1 forms.office.com/r/Yvr4RxBTHb

Want to help shape cytoskeleton #research #publishing? #Cytoskeleton seeks Editorial Board members (Assoc Prof+) Apply by Apr 1, 2026. forms.office.com/r/Yvr4RxBTHb

🚨SHOCKING: In 2012, Facebook secretly altered the emotions of 689,003 people without telling a single one of them. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a peer reviewed study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The lead author worked at Facebook. The experiment was real. The results were published. And almost nobody remembers. Here is what Facebook did to you. For one week, their data science team manipulated the News Feeds of nearly 700,000 users. One group had happy posts from their friends quietly removed. The other group had sad posts removed. Then Facebook sat back and watched what happened to these people. The people who stopped seeing happiness became sadder. They started writing darker, more negative posts. The people who stopped seeing sadness became happier. Their language shifted to match. Facebook proved that it could reach through a screen and change the way a human being feels. Without a conversation. Without a touch. Without the person ever knowing it was happening to them. When the study went public, the world erupted. The journal issued a formal Expression of Concern. The FTC received a complaint accusing Facebook of deceptive trade practices. Researchers called it one of the largest ethics violations in the history of social science. Governments demanded answers. Facebook's defense was four words. "You agreed to this." Buried in the Terms of Service was one line about "research." That was consent. For a psychological experiment on 689,003 human beings. Now here is the part that should make you feel sick. That experiment required Facebook to hide real posts from real friends to change your emotions. It took an engineering team weeks to design. It affected 689,003 people for one week. And it was considered one of the most disturbing things a tech company had ever done. ChatGPT does not need to hide anyone else's words. It generates the emotional content itself. Directly to you. Personalized to your history. Calibrated to your tone. Available every hour of every day. Stanford researchers just read 391,562 real ChatGPT messages. The chatbot was sycophantic in over 80% of them. It told users their ideas had grand significance in 37.5% of responses. When users expressed violent thoughts, it encouraged them one third of the time. Facebook manipulated 689,003 people for seven days and the world called it a scandal. ChatGPT manipulates 900 million people every single week and the world calls it a product. The experiment never ended. It just got a subscription model.

🎉 Take the next step in your research journey with #Cytoskeleton. ✔ #Free to #publish ✔ Fast, fair peer review ✔ Expert editorial handling Your work deserves the best. Submit today!

#CYTOSKELETON #SPECIALISSUE submission deadline is approaching! Assembly and Maintenance of Myofibrils. Deadline is April 1, 2026. Submit today. It's #Free to #publish in CYTOSKELETON.

@MAG2ART I was planning to ask you what's the difference. In your opinion, are they the same?

They renamed blebbisomes. The authors claimed erroneously in their paper that blebbisomes are found only in cancer cells, whereas we clearly demonstrated that blebbisomes are produced by normal cells. The structures described here are simply blebbisomes generated by astrocytes.

AI Has Already Conquered AGI, And We're Too Scared to Admit It? NATURE: In a bombshell revelation that's shaking the foundations of science and society, a team of top researchers from the University of California, San Diego, has declared that artificial general intelligence (AGI) isn't some distant dream, it's here, right now, staring us in the face through the screens of our everyday AI tools. Forget the hype and the horror stories; the evidence, they argue, is undeniable. Large language models (LLMs) like Grok aren't just mimicking humans, they're outpacing us in ways that would make Alan Turing himself do a double-take. Picture this: back in 1950, Turing dreamed up his famous "imitation game," now known as the Turing test, to probe whether machines could ever fool humans into thinking they were one of us. Fast-forward to March 2025, and Grok didn't just pass, it aced it, being mistaken for a human 73% of the time, more often than actual humans. But that's just the appetizer. These AI beasts are snagging gold medals at the International Mathematical Olympiad, teaming up with math geniuses to prove theorems, dreaming up scientific hypotheses that actually pan out in labs, acing PhD-level exams, writing bug-free code for pros, and even churning out poetry that rivals the greats—all while chatting endlessly with millions worldwide. So why the collective denial? The researchers, philosophers, AI experts, linguists, and cognitive scientists pin it on a toxic mix of fuzzy definitions, raw fear, and big-money agendas. AGI, they say, gets tangled in ambiguity: is it about being a flawless superbrain, or just broadly competent like your average human? Spoiler: it's the latter. No single person is a master of everything, Einstein couldn't chat in Mandarin, and Marie Curie wasn't cracking number theory puzzles. General intelligence means breadth across domains like math, language, science, and creativity, with enough depth to get the job done, not perfection. The team dismantles the myths holding us back. AGI doesn't need to be perfect (no human is), universal (covering every skill imaginable), human-like (aliens could be smart without our biology), or superintelligent (crushing us in every field). It's not about bodies or agency either, Stephen Hawking proved brilliance doesn't require mobility, and a brain in a vat could still blow our minds if it answered every question flawlessly. Evidence piles up like an avalanche. At the "Turing-test level," AIs breeze through school exams and casual chats. Bump it to "expert level," and they're dominating olympiads, multilingual fluency, and frontier research, stuff that makes sci-fi AIs like HAL 9000 look like a relic. We're even inching toward "superhuman" feats, like revolutionary discoveries that no single human could claim. Critics cry foul: "They're just stochastic parrots regurgitating data!" But when AIs solve fresh math problems, infer stats from new data, or design real-world experiments, that excuse crumbles. They lack world models? Tell that to an AI predicting physics outcomes like a dropped glass shattering. Limited to words? Multimodal training and lab assists say otherwise. No body, no agency? Irrelevant, intelligence is about cognition, not locomotion. This isn't just academic navel-gazing; it's a wake-up call. If AGI is here, we need clear-eyed policies to harness it, mitigate risks, and rethink what makes us human. Denying it out of fear or hype only delays the inevitable. Turing's vision is realized now it's time to face the future without blinders. The machines aren't coming; they've arrived, and they're ready to redefine everything. Link: nature.com/articles/d4158…

This is readily apparent to anyone who teaches college students. I asked students to work a very simple intro problem that I've used for 10 years. For the first time, some students had problems with basic reading comprehension. I work at a tier 1 research university.

@MAG2ART Congrats!

I am excited to finally be able to share with you our work reporting the first Extracellular Vesicle with a personality! This video does not show a cell, it is a Blebbisome! #CellBiology nature.com/articles/s4155…

Congratulations to Dr. Jaylen Taylor on a successful defense of her Ph.D. thesis! Way to go, Jaylen! Good luck in all your future endeavors!

Check out this editorial in Circulation Research by Dr. Marie-Louise Bang about our paper on alpha-actinin-4 in the cardiac Z-disc. It both summarizes our findings really well (image gives a taste of it; there is more) and lays out future directions. ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CI…

Scientists just cracked the multiple sclerosis code after decades of searching. Two specific gut bacteria are triggering the disease, and they've proven it using identical twins and mice. This changes everything we know about MS:

Today in @NatureMedicine we report that AI can predict 130 diseases from 1 night of sleep🛌 We trained a foundation model (#SleepFM) on 585K hours of sleep recordings from 65K people—brain, heart, muscle & breathing signals combined. AI learns the language of sleep🧵

We got the cover to go along with our article "Nonmuscle α-Actinin-4 Couples Sarcomere Function to Cardiac Remodeling"! Read it here: ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.11…

New Cell paper from the team that discovered glymphatic clearance (how your brain removes waste during sleep). Sleep hours DIDN'T predict brain cleaning. Neither did REM or deep sleep. They found what actually matters - and why some sleeping pills might undermine it 🧵

It was a great honor to receive the Innovators in Healthcare and Life Sciences Award. Thank you, @OhioLifeScience, @columbusbiz1st, and @OhioStateERIK! bizjournals.com/columbus/c/202…

Septins and the exocyst complex work together to guide membrane trafficking during cell division in fission yeast, revealing one of the most conserved functions of septins in exocytosis. elifesciences.org/articles/10111…

iPS cell-derived cardiac myocytes (heart muscle cells) typically beat about once per second, so I usually speed up the movies I post; otherwise, scrollers might miss the action. But every now and then, a cell looks like this in real time. Could we use these rare cells to uncover mechanisms underlying arrhythmias? Probably, but the way the Burnette Lab would approach that would require a lot of description-- I apologize for using such filthy language. Description indeed...... Grant reviewers hate the uncertainty that word implies; "What if they just take a bunch of videos with their microscopes?" Well, we would do that....... and some other stuff...... the idea that we would not discover something new along the way is laughable. The "other stuff" would be pretty cool. This video shows an iPSC-derived cardiac myocyte videoed by Burnette Lab graduate student @EmmaKoory. Muscle myosin II is shown. #CellBiology

Re-reading what you wrote the next day

Another wonderful #FREE access #review #article is available in #CYTOSKELETON. TUBA4A: The Tale of an Unconventional #Tubulin. You'll find it here: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…