
Patrick David
1K posts

Patrick David
@pdquant
https://t.co/2XiwDy6aTR 🕳️ Physics 🕳️ Hardware 🕳️ AI Research 🕳️ Code 🕳️ Design 🕳️Recovering Quant







Ahahahaha, the James Webb Space Telescope continues to deliver massive L’s for astrophysics. A new paper shows that the “Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation” can be explained entirely by the energy of recently discovered Early Mature Galaxies — massive galaxies that the JWST discovered which crushed the existing models of galaxy formation because they formed much earlier than astrophysicists thought possible. But now these EMGs turn out to account for the entire energy density of the CMB radiation, which was believed to be a “snapshot” of the first light emitted after the Big Bang, when the universe was ~379,000 years old. The variations in the CMB were believed to be relics of quantum fluctuations in the dense plasma of the Big Bang. If these new findings are accepted (and there’s no reason not to accept them), then all of the following flagship findings of cosmology are thrown into question: — Big Bang theory: foundational cosmological model undermined — Cosmic inflation: loses observational justification — ΛCDM model: key parameters become unreliable — CMB power spectrum: loses predictive relevance — Dark energy: inferred from CMB; may be mischaracterized — Dark matter density: current estimates may be invalid — Age of the universe: must be recalculated — Primordial nucleosynthesis: needs alternative explanation — Hubble constant (H₀): no longer reliably constrained by CMB — Large-scale structure formation: initial conditions unclear — Reionization epoch: timing and cause questioned — Cosmic distance ladder: calibration may be flawed — ISW (Integrated Sachs–Wolfe) effect: interpretation invalidated — Acoustic peaks in CMB: no longer evidence of primordial sound waves — Polarization of the CMB: origin needs reassessment — Baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO): decoupled from CMB — Cosmic curvature: flatness inference challenged — Matter–radiation equality timing: re-evaluated — Gravitational lensing of CMB: loses standard interpretation — Planck and WMAP findings: foundational assumptions invalidated My friends, do not listen to scientists when they act like they have everything figured out and you’re a retard for questioning them. They have abandoned the humility needed for scientific discovery long ago, and it’s only when new findings arrive with shock and awe that their hubris is exposed.



The view that imagines AI wiping out jobs or causing some overnight shock to the system doesn’t contemplate that companies are a made up of a series of bottlenecks. When AI accelerates work in one area, you run into a bottleneck somewhere else. As any individual workflow gets more efficient, the ultimate productivity gain is still constrained by some other part of the system. And usually it’s the case that that part of the system will not have inherently seen the same impact of AI efficiency, which means humans are still doing the work. Take almost any process in an enterprise and you can see how this plays out. If AI Agents generate leads for the sales team, the bottleneck will be humans to have conversations with those customers. And if the leads are good, that will mean more sales hiring. If AI Agents generate more code, you will eventually be bottlenecked by the engineers that can review and incorporate that code into production. You can quickly see how this scales to any process in an organization. Economists and others tend to totally miss how work actually happens in a company; it’s not a series of wholly independent tasks, but instead highly interdependent tasks that all link to each other across a system. This is of course the natural rate limiter of AI efficiency gains, but also the reason why humans will still be doing so many jobs in the future.


Saw Nassim Taleb irl first time yesterday. He is much nicer and more importantly much funnier in person than his online persona! Kudos to @tracyalloway for asking the question last night to the audience how many were blocked by Taleb! A couple dozen raised our hands. 🤣
















Big news: After millions of emails processed and 2,000+ daily users in beta, Cora is officially open to everyone. No more waitlist. Meet Cora, your AI inbox assistant—a $150,000 chief of staff for $15/month. When you last tried Cora, it was…. fine… at personalization. Now, Cora’s personalization is incredible from minute one. Connect your email → Cora reads your email history → Creates your personalized profile → Understands you immediately With Cora, you get: • Email Briefs 2x daily, on your schedule • Pre-written drafts in your voice • Smart email management • A 24/7 Assistant (chat on web or email c(at)cora(dot)computer) that learns your email preferences Pick the plan that works for you: - Cora Professional: $15/month (or an Every subscription) for 2 connected email accounts - Cora Unlimited: $30/month for unlimited connected email accounts 💌 We built Cora to make email feel human again. Because you were made to live your life, not chase inbox zero. Ready when you are → cora.computer









