Marcus Storm-Mollard

1.7K posts

Marcus Storm-Mollard banner
Marcus Storm-Mollard

Marcus Storm-Mollard

@marcus1storm

Founder @clarm_ai @ycombinator X25 - automates inbound sales. Building in public. 🇬🇧🇨🇭🌉

San Francisco, CA Katılım Mart 2020
1.3K Takip Edilen958 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
It was a pleasure to ask the Shadow Foreign Secretary @DavidLammy and others to set out foreign policy visions for Britain last Sat. Decisive positions on Ukraine, Russia, China, the US, and Europe. Watch back the whole @thefabians conversation below. youtube.com/watch?v=Js8obv…
YouTube video
YouTube
Marcus Storm-Mollard tweet media
English
0
3
15
0
Marcus Storm-Mollard retweetledi
vittorio
vittorio@IterIntellectus·
ok so the rosie story was even more insane than it looked > be the australian tech guy who made a cancer vaccine for his dog > first try: genetic algorithms to design a new drug from scratch > works in simulation but would take years to test > second try: screen 1 million existing compounds against the mutation > two weeks of computation. find a perfect match > it's patented > patent holder says no to compassionate use > what_did_you_expect.jpg > spend two weeks just being with the dog > 2am idea: what if i just make a vaccine > chatgpt for pipeline, gemini for construct, grok for validation > 300 gigabytes of raw sequencing data to half a page of vaccine construct > university ethics approval would take until mid-2026 > dog doesn't have that long > panik > canine cancer expert connects him to a lab in queensland with existing approval > drive 14 hours to get there > inject > three weeks later the tumors swell. immune system swarming > six weeks later shrinking > two months later legs returning to normal > one mass doesn't respond > sequence it again > different cancer. the vaccine worked. the body grew a new tumor he's now building a company so every dog owner can do this he had the technology the whole time. he spent 18 months fighting for permission to use it
vittorio tweet media
Paul S. Conyngham@paul_conyngham

x.com/i/article/2036…

English
231
2K
19.4K
1.4M
Marcus Storm-Mollard retweetledi
Cheng Lou
Cheng Lou@_chenglou·
My dear front-end developers (and anyone who’s interested in the future of interfaces): I have crawled through depths of hell to bring you, for the foreseeable years, one of the more important foundational pieces of UI engineering (if not in implementation then certainly at least in concept): Fast, accurate and comprehensive userland text measurement algorithm in pure TypeScript, usable for laying out entire web pages without CSS, bypassing DOM measurements and reflow
English
1.1K
7K
56.1K
17.5M
Marcus Storm-Mollard retweetledi
Aaron Levie
Aaron Levie@levie·
Jevons paradox is happening in real time. Companies, especially outside of tech, are realizing that they can now afford to take on software projects that they wouldn’t have been able to tackle before because now AI lets them do so. We’re going to start to use software for all new things in the economy because it’s incrementally cheaper to produce. Marketing teams at big companies will have engineers helping to automate workflows. Engineers in life sciences and healthcare will automate research. Small businesses will hire engineers for the first to build better digital experiences. And as long as AI agents still require a human who understands what to prompt, how to review when an agent goes off the rails, how it guide back, how to maintain the system that was built, how to fix the ongoing bugs, and more, we will still have humans managing these agents. This is why all the advice you get of not going into engineering is wrong. The world is going to increasingly be made up of software, and the people that understand it best will be in a strong economic position. This will happen in other roles as well where output goes up and demand increases.
Lenny Rachitsky@lennysan

Engineering job openings are at the highest levels we’ve seen in over 3 years There are over 67,000 (!!!) eng openings at tech companies globally right now, with 26,000 just in the U.S. We don’t know if there would have been more open roles if not for AI or if AI is actually leading to more open roles, but since the start of this year, the increase in open eng roles is accelerating even more.

English
224
654
4.6K
1M
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
Brits will forever be the Athens to America's Rome 😩 Americans will conquer the world and Brits will be there not to name cryptographic concepts after paedophiles
Marcus Storm-Mollard tweet media
English
0
0
0
40
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
@anishmoonka That’s crazy. You’d have to give actual drugs to an adult to induce that kind of behavior. Voice AI - seems like there are many formats which could solve the “respond specifically” piece. A specific toy or config that has a persistence specific to them which the kid can pick up.
English
0
0
1
16
Anish Moonka
Anish Moonka@anishmoonka·
that stillness you’re describing is documented. an italian study on preschoolers found 40% showed irritability when devices were taken away, and about 9% met criterai for screen addiction. on the voice AI question, it’s interesting but the research says kids under 3 struggle to learn even from interactive screens unless a live adult is involved. the brain needs someone who responds to them specifically (not just responds)
English
1
0
3
560
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
iPads are like drugs for toddlers. You give one to a kid and they stop running around / talking, and sit down very still and stare very intently at the screen. If you try and take one away they start crying. Curious to see if voice based AI has positive impacts on development, maybe significantly positive impacts. Nothing can be worse than the small screen
Anish Moonka@anishmoonka

Every additional minute your toddler spends on a screen, they hear about 7 fewer words from you. By age 3, they also make 5 fewer attempts to talk back and lose one back-and-forth exchange with a parent. That’s from a 2024 JAMA Pediatrics study that put speech-recognition recorders inside actual homes across Australia. The 49% stat in this tweet is real. It comes from a 2017 study at SickKids Hospital in Toronto that tracked 894 children aged 6 to 24 months. For every 30 minutes of handheld screen time per day, the risk of a child being slow to form words and sentences increased by 49%. But only the speech output was affected. Gestures, body language, and social interaction were all fine. The mechanism is displacement. A toddler’s brain learns language through something researchers call “serve and return”: baby babbles, parent responds, baby tries again. That loop is how the brain’s language wiring gets built. When a screen is on, that exchange drops off. And we can now see it on brain scans. A 2020 JAMA Pediatrics study at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital scanned the brains of 47 kids aged 3 to 5. Kids with more screen time had weaker white matter, the insulation around nerve fibers that helps different parts of the brain talk to each other. The weak spots were in the exact areas that control language and early reading. A 2023 study at Tohoku University in Japan followed 7,097 children from birth. More screen time at age 1 was associated with higher rates of communication delays at ages 2 and 4. Each additional hour widened the gap. The AAP recommends zero screen time for children under 18 months, except for video calls. The average child under 2 already gets over an hour a day. But a 2023 systematic review found that when kids with speech delays stopped using devices for six months, 36.7% showed measurable improvement. The word in the tweet is “destroys.” The data says it’s closer to “delays,” and in many cases, delays that respond when the screens come off.

English
1
0
5
943
Marcus Storm-Mollard retweetledi
Anish Moonka
Anish Moonka@anishmoonka·
Every time you get a cancer biopsy, the lab makes a tissue slide that costs about $5. It shows the shape of your cells under a microscope, and every cancer patient already has one on file. There’s a much fancier version of that test called multiplex immunofluorescence (basically a protein-level map showing which immune cells are near your tumor and what they’re doing). It costs thousands of dollars per sample, takes specialized equipment most hospitals don’t have, and barely scales. But it’s the kind of data oncologists need to figure out whether immunotherapy will actually work for you. Right now, only about 20 to 40% of cancer patients respond to immunotherapy, and one of the biggest reasons is that doctors can’t easily tell whether a tumor is “hot” (immune cells actively fighting it) or “cold” (immune system ignoring it). Microsoft, Providence Health, and the University of Washington trained an AI to analyze the $5 slide and predict what the expensive test would show across 21 different protein markers. They called it GigaTIME, trained it on 40 million cells in which both the cheap slide and the expensive test coexisted, and then turned it loose on 14,256 real cancer patients across 51 hospitals in 7 US states. The results landed in Cell, one of the most selective journals in biology. The model generated about 300,000 virtual protein maps covering 24 cancer types and 306 subtypes. It found 1,234 real, verified connections between immune cell behavior, genetic mutations, tumor staging, and patient survival that were previously invisible at this scale. When they tested it against a completely separate database of 10,200 cancer patients, the results matched up almost perfectly (0.88 out of 1.0 agreement). Nature Methods named spatial proteomics (mapping where specific proteins sit inside your tissue) its Method of the Year in 2024, and specifically cited GigaTIME in a March 2026 update as a model that “democratizes” this kind of analysis. The full model is open-source on Hugging Face. Any cancer research lab with archived biopsy slides, and most of them have thousands, can now run virtual immune profiling without buying a single piece of new equipment.
Satya Nadella@satyanadella

We’ve trained a multimodal AI model to turn routine pathology slides into spatial proteomics, with the potential to reduce time and cost while expanding access to cancer care.

English
103
1.8K
11.1K
936.7K
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
“My cousin does AI for ham” Regular overheard in SF sentence
Marcus Storm-Mollard tweet media
English
0
0
1
67
Marcus Storm-Mollard retweetledi
Kaito | 海斗
Kaito | 海斗@_kaitodev·
5 minutes ago, @karpathy just dropped karpathy/jobs! he scraped every job in the US economy (342 occupations from BLS), scored each one's AI exposure 0-10 using an LLM, and visualized it as a treemap. if your whole job happens on a screen you're cooked. average score across all jobs is 5.3/10. software devs: 8-9. roofers: 0-1. medical transcriptionists: 10/10 💀 karpathy.ai/jobs
Kaito | 海斗 tweet media
English
975
1.8K
12.2K
3.6M
Marcus Storm-Mollard retweetledi
Cody Schneider
Cody Schneider@codyschneiderxx·
I believe this more than anything right now the most effective startup employees will have custom agents and personal software they bring to their jobs and these people will become 100x employees how I see this working: personally, the way I operate now is simple basically whatever I’m working on, I’m trying to automate parts of it in the background while I work on it I’m either building agents that can take over the task as it comes up or building software that eliminates it entirely and this stack of software slowly becomes an extension of m every week it gets a extended, refined, and more capable of doing the things I don’t want to do or the things I shouldn’t be wasting time on over time, it stops feeling like “tools” and starts feeling like infrastructure a personal backend a private ops team a swarm of specialized agents that quietly remove friction from everything I touch and once you start working like this, it’s impossible to go back you start seeing every repetitive action, every manual process, every annoying workflow as a bug not in the company’s system but in your system if you fix 3–5 of these bugs every week, you wake up a few months later with: - your own automations - your own research agents - your own monitoring systems - your own custom interfaces - your own intelligence layer sitting on top of your job it’s compounding leverage and I think that’s where the 100x employee comes from not from raw talent not from hustle but from the quiet accumulation of self-augmenting tools that raise your ceiling until you’re operating on an entirely different curve most people will still be “doing work.” a few will be architecting systems that do their work for them those people win those people become irreplaceable those people become their own force multipliers companies that recognize this and empower it will end up hiring individuals who effectively show up with their own internal R&D department in their github repo we’re entering the era of the 1000x startup employee and it’s going to change everything
English
69
39
609
30K
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
"The net result of this is more jobs, not fewer. As Ryan Petersen likes to say, the human desire for more things is absolutely limitless. We can actually fulfill that desire now — if we have the agency to prompt it for ourselves."
English
0
0
0
14
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
"If you’re a worker — someone who trades labor for a living — this is the moment to become a builder. Start a business. And if you’re already management or capital, it’s time to go 10x more hardcore on what your aspirations could be. Not eking out 5% efficiency gains. Not increasing profit margins 2% by lowering cost and firing people. Those are the old games. The new question is: what would it look like to build a product or service so good that people would happily pay 10x what they pay now?"
English
1
0
0
27
Marcus Storm-Mollard
Marcus Storm-Mollard@marcus1storm·
"Here is what I think is actually going on with the fear: our fear of the future is directly proportional to how small our ambitions are. If your plan is to keep doing exactly what you’re doing, then yes, a machine that can do it faster and cheaper is terrifying. But if your plan is to do something dramatically bigger, then the machine is the best news you’ve ever gotten."
Garry Tan@garrytan

Boil the Oceans You know the phrase: “don’t boil the ocean.” Everyone’s said it in some overly ambitious meeting. It’s good advice in normal times. It keeps teams focused. It prevents scope creep. But we are no longer in normal times, and I think it’s time to retire saying it. Artificial Superintelligence means it’s time to boil the ocean. We’ll start with a few lakes first. I was recently with a university endowment’s head of private investing who told me their engineers were terrified for their jobs after seeing what Claude Code could do. And I get it — that’s the natural first reaction. But it’s the wrong one. It’s a zero-sum reaction to a positive-sum moment. Instead of worrying about doing the same thing we’ve been doing for cheaper, why not focus on doing the thing we never even dreamed of doing? Why can’t that endowment achieve 50% net IRR instead of 10%? Why can’t a startup deliver a service that is 100x better than the incumbent? Why can’t we have fusion energy? Why can’t we talk to every single user and have a perfect understanding of every bug in our product? These aren’t rhetorical questions anymore. They’re engineering problems with paths to solutions. Here is what I think is actually going on with the fear: our fear of the future is directly proportional to how small our ambitions are. If your plan is to keep doing exactly what you’re doing, then yes, a machine that can do it faster and cheaper is terrifying. But if your plan is to do something dramatically bigger, then the machine is the best news you’ve ever gotten. If you’re a worker — someone who trades labor for a living — this is the moment to become a builder. Start a business. And if you’re already management or capital, it’s time to go 10x more hardcore on what your aspirations could be. Not eking out 5% efficiency gains. Not increasing profit margins 2% by lowering cost and firing people. Those are the old games. The new question is: what would it look like to build a product or service so good that people would happily pay 10x what they pay now? The net result of this is more jobs, not fewer. As Ryan Petersen likes to say, the human desire for more things is absolutely limitless. We can actually fulfill that desire now — if we have the agency to prompt it for ourselves. Buckminster Fuller coined the term “ephemeralization” in 1938: doing more and more with less and less until eventually you can do everything with nothing. His entire vision of progress was about technology enabling radical expansion of human capability through dematerialization. He traced this from stone bridges to iron trusses to steel cables — each iteration stronger, longer, lighter, cheaper. He wasn’t describing job destruction. He was describing civilization getting better at being civilization. This is Jevons Paradox for everything. When you make a resource dramatically more efficient, you don’t use less of it — you use vastly more. Steam engines didn’t reduce coal consumption. They made coal so useful that demand exploded. The same thing is about to happen with intelligence, with labor, with every service and product we can imagine. But Jevons Paradox doesn’t activate on its own. It requires capital and management to actually raise their ambitions — to boil lakes and oceans instead of drowning them in committee That’s what startups have always been good at: moving fast in the face of radical uncertainty, building for the 10x future while everyone else is optimizing for the 1.05x present. Time to start.

English
1
0
1
101