D

Affinity x Cavalry x Blender x DaVinci x Autograph. Yeah, they are all free to use. That's just crazy. 🥶

Google DeepMind researcher argues that LLMs can never be conscious, not in 10 years or 100 years. "Expecting an algorithmic description to instantiate the quality it maps is like expecting the mathematical formula of gravity to physically exert weight."

it's crazy to see Manila nightlife (Esquire PH) and budots (Scout Mag) in parallel discourses right now when 3 years ago most of that literature didn't exist. I thought I'd share some of my related works that hopefully those new to this discussion can gain insight from :) 🧵🪡

Billionaires don’t have bank accounts like you and me. They have art collections,Yachts,Mansions,Stocks. None of it gets taxed until they sell it. So they just never sell it. They borrow against it instead. Live off the loans. Pay almost nothing. Then when they die, their kids inherit it all tax-free. The wealth never gets taxed, It just gets passed down. And we wonder why the gap keeps getting wider.

a sight like this was so appealing.. before netflix

kasi nga drug use is more a public health issue than a criminal one but siyempre yung article frames it as a spectacle

Current price of oil in the Philippines

Many people have asked the question, does the educational attainment data have a relationship with election results? Masasagot natin iyan sa Miyerkules. 📈📉 Kitakits at maraming salamat!

sunsun

BREAKING: An AI just wrote a research paper. Submitted it to a top science conference. Passed peer review. Nobody on the review panel knew it was AI. The paper is called "The AI Scientist." Published last week in Nature. Built by Sakana AI in Tokyo, with researchers from Oxford and UBC. Here is what it did — completely on its own. It read existing scientific literature. Formed a hypothesis. Designed an experiment. Ran the experiment. Analyzed the results. Wrote the full academic paper. Then peer-reviewed its own work. No human at any stage. They submitted three fully AI-generated papers to a top ML conference under blind peer review. Human reviewers were told some might be AI, but not which ones. One was accepted. It scored higher than 55% of human-authored papers at that same conference. The accepted paper cost $15 in compute to produce. Fifteen dollars. Now here is the part nobody is talking about. The team found a clear scaling law: stronger foundation models produce higher-quality research outputs. Better base model in, better science out. Which means this gets dramatically better — automatically — every time a new model drops. Right now it is limited to computational ML experiments. No biology. No chemistry. No physical labs. For now. What happens when the thing that discovers new science... is itself?

I have a PhD in economics from the University of Chicago and my main work task these days is removing em-dashes from Claude output so it's not overly obvious.

"There were other rooms, too, and other scenes, spoken about more quietly but hardly hidden from the people inside them: chemsex circles where even meth and G were tolerated with a casualness that now feels more frightening than transgressive." Thoughts? Read in full: esquiremag.ph/long-reads/pro…

One example why a medication has been taken but doesn’t work. What other examples are there?

😭😭😭

they took your G-spot from you

This blew my mind. OpenAI just published the first comprehensive study of how 700 million people actually use ChatGPT. The results destroy every assumption about AI adoption. Here's everything you need to know in 3 minutes:

bro this is my first time using licensed photoshop :(

You gotta admit—this is a pretty badass picture from the Emirati cabinet meeting.

None of this guy's stuff has been peer reviewed. Loser.

Enjoy! link.springer.com/content/pdf/10…