greygoo222

Source: it came to me in a dream

"I’ve seen it before, though: it’s very much part of the fascist playbook."

Holy reach

This is slop.

How exactly do you think you are going to die in a heatwave? Please explain the logistics of this.

> So here we are, handing our grandchildren a life probably worse than what people experienced in the late 1800s to early 1900s. This way we avoided a bit of inconvenience in our life style.

Lol. We are going to get richer. Climate change means becoming richer at a somewhat slower pace.

> All biomolecules are chiral.

The confidence with which people say utterly asinine things...

You can check with your own eyes that entire paragraphs of his work were copied verbatim:

https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/27/cambridge-jason-arday...

https://ncofnas.com/p/dei-fraud-and-cover-up-at-cambridge

Entire paragraphs were duplicated verbatim:

https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/27/cambridge-jason-arday...

https://ncofnas.com/p/dei-fraud-and-cover-up-at-cambridge

Downright delusional.

This is a pretty low-quality article that didn't give me the impression the author spent any time in the "rationalist community." It's just a list of the few mainstream controversies.

I am referring to t.me/hackernewslive, 27k subscribers. This post was reposted on Telegram within 2 minutes of it going live on HackerNews, when it still had <5 upvotes, so I feel there has to be either some manual or LLM-driven curation here, or something else.

Who runs the HackerNews Telegram channel? I used to think they had some algorithmic repost script that grabbed top posts, but this is a 5 minute old post by a low-karma account and it got posted to Telegram.

The world is so big, why spend 40 years in a single place?

It's like the people writing this shit have never been a teenager. I feel like an old man yelling at clouds, but damn, the internet was so much less sanitized when I was 13 and we were happy for it.

Has anyone ever heard of this person? Why did this get posted?

Leetcode/hackerrank problems aren't that high variance, dedicate a weekend studying and you should be good.

I'm a new grad. It took me about three weeks to get two offers, both from cold applications. I applied to ~100 jobs in total and got first round interviews from 10% of the ones I cold applied to, much higher when I had an in.

I then, uh, turned both offers down because I thought the roles weren't interesting enough and didn't pay enough to make up for not being interesting (170k base). Now I am back in the process and, knock on wood, I am in the middle of final rounds with several companies and expect to have a much better offer by next week.

I have a background in ML and agentic systems, which did come up, but my resume isn't outstanding. No big tech or frontier lab internships, no published papers, no unicorn startup. I wouldn't say finding jobs has been easy, but it hasn't been remotely as difficult as this thread implies, and I believe the statistics back me up here. I suspect this is a "people who aren't struggling don't complain about it online" phenomenon.

Regardless, I wish everyone here best of luck in finding a job.

Please name one "third world country" that enforces gender roles less harshly than the US, particularly the liberal US cities where gender diversity is the most common.

Utterly asinine article that doesn't understand its own subject matter.

Can confirm.

The people behind the website asked a voice agent to program it, and the STT parsed "agent" as "asian."

If someone wants to take Ozempic for cosmetic reasons, that's their business. I am almost certain you personally indulge in riskier activities than using Ozempic, or... modafinil? You know people still use research chemicals, testosterone, and modafinil, right?

Depends on how they work. Many genes that are active during early development are entirely silenced throughout adulthood, or otherwise have no effect.

Quite a biased source, no? This doesn't provide evidence that these differences are biological. Boys are much more likely to exercise than girls due to social norms: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10478357/.

You can debate what policies are the most fair without calling trans women "men."

Transition changes biology. We don't yet have the technology to fully reverse the effects of male puberty, so there can be reasonable debate about trans women who transitioned after puberty, but early transitioners have no meaningful advantage. Their bodies, in an athletic context, are female.

This is also true for many cisgender intersex women with XY chromosomes. Someone with androgen insensitivity can have XY chromosomes, yet be capable of giving birth. Drawing the line at having a Y chromosome makes no sense.

You don't understand how the technology in question works, and you're just making shit up because you don't want to admit to being wrong.

What are you alleging here anyways? That all the scientists quoted and photographed in the article discussing their part in making the vaccine are in on the game? That the Australian made the story up wholesale? Come on.

He is not using an LLM in some new and exciting way. The process of making a personalized mRNA vaccine looks something like this:

1. Collect and sequence patient's normal and tumor genomes 2. Predict immunogenic neoantigens from genome 3. Generate optimized mRNA sequence from neoantigens 4. Create vaccine from sequence

modulo some variations, which I wrote off the top of my head because I understand this technology.

Steps 1 and 4 are done by contracted labs. Steps 2 and 3 are doable through open-source computational tools and a little engineering. What does ChatGPT do here? ChatGPT explains the process, finds labs that will do 1 and 4 for pay, finds published algorithms and data for steps 2 and 3. It's barely more complicated than what ChatGPT would do to help a student with their homework.

Legal documents, on the other hand? Have you ever tried to get an LLM to do your taxes? It's not easy.

Have you ever tried writing a long, complicated document with an LLM? The last 20% takes 99% of the work.

ChatGPT did not make the treatment. ChatGPT summarized literature explaining how to make similar treatments, and then specialized tools were used to make the treatment. It is perfectly reasonable that ChatGPT can summarize literature and not make compliant 100 page legal documents.

The principle behind personalized mRNA vaccines is simple enough, and it's perfectly plausible that someone with money and lab access can create an effective treatment not offered through conventional means. It would be plausible even for a human patient right now, with mRNA vaccines still hung up in clinical trials. For a dog? Of course.