SpineCloud

Their CEO, Alex Zhavoronkov, told CNBC that Insilico has already developed at least 28 drugs using generative AI tools, with nearly half already at a clinical stage. They develop their models in Canada and the ME, and then conduct the early preclinical drug development in China.

Claude knows! —> The Lump of Labor Fallacy and Why AGI Unemployment Panic Is Economically Illiterate Let me lay this out with full rigor, because this argument deserves to be prosecuted completely rather than waved away with a sound bite. I. What the Lump of Labor Fallacy Actually Is The lump of labor fallacy is the assumption that there exists a fixed, finite quantity of work in an economy — a lump — such that if a machine (or an immigrant, or a woman entering the workforce) does some of it, there is necessarily less left for human workers to do. It treats employment as a zero-sum pie. The fallacy was named and formalized in the early 20th century but the error it describes is far older. It animated the Luddite riots of 1811–1816, where English textile workers destroyed power looms convinced that the machines would steal their jobs permanently. It drove opposition to the spinning jenny, the cotton gin, the mechanical reaper, the steam engine, the telegraph, the railroad, the automobile assembly line, the personal computer, and every other major labor-displacing technology in the history of industrial civilization. Every single time, the catastrophists were wrong. Not partially wrong. Structurally, fundamentally, categorically wrong — because they misunderstood the nature of economic production itself. The reason the fixed-pie assumption fails is this: demand is not fixed. Work generates income. Income generates demand for goods and services. Demand for goods and services generates new categories of work. This is an engine, not a reservoir. When you drain some of the reservoir with a machine, the engine speeds up and refills it — and often refills it past its previous level. II. The Classical Economic Mechanism That Destroys the Fallacy To understand why the lump-of-labor assumption is wrong about AGI, you need to understand the precise mechanism by which technological unemployment resolves itself. There are four distinct channels, all operating simultaneously: Channel 1: The Productivity-Demand Feedback Loop (Say’s Law, Modified) When a technology increases the productivity of labor or replaces labor entirely in a given task, it lowers the cost of producing whatever that task was part of. Lower production costs mean either: ∙Lower prices for consumers (real purchasing power rises), or ∙Higher profits for producers (which get reinvested, distributed as dividends, or spent as wages for other workers), or ∙Both. Either way, aggregate real income in the economy rises. That additional real income does not evaporate. It gets spent on something — including goods and services that didn’t previously exist or were previously too expensive to consume at scale. That spending creates demand. That demand creates jobs. This is not a theoretical conjecture. The average American in 1900 spent roughly 43% of their income on food. Today it’s around 10%. Agricultural mechanization didn’t produce a nation of starving unemployed farm laborers — it freed up 33% of household income to be spent on automobiles, television sets, air conditioning, healthcare, education, travel, smartphones, and streaming services, most of which didn’t exist as industries in 1900. The workers who left farms went to factories, then to offices, then to service industries, then to information industries. The economy didn’t run out of work. It metamorphosed.

"now is the perfect time to start a company" is pure cope. just enjoy life while the old world is still here. no one will need your software in an AGI world. dont waste your time. live. make memories. AGI will crush everything. live for yourself. nobody will care in 5 years

Nobody wants to read AI-generated books, watch an AI-generated movie or listen to an AI-generated song.

"2+ people can do it out of an unfiltered pool of 10 people that might well be a below-average sample" is not the sign of a insurmountable challenge. It's not certainly where I would set the bar for "super intelligence". ASI is when AI is better than *every single human* -- for instance we have ASI for chess and Go today.

BREAKING: OpenAI will pause development of its erotic “adult mode” chatbot following concerns from investors.

Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' AI Data Center Moratorium Act contains a moratorium on all US datacenter upgrading and construction, as well as a ban on the export of all US-origin GPU's. Press conference this afternoon.