Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Papers: 1. Metacognition: ideas and insights from neuro- and educational sciences Damien S. Fleur, Bert Bredeweg, and Wouter van den Bos[research.hva +1] 2. Metacognitive Information Theory Peter Dayan Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany

18,946 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Michael Johnson: "AI SHOULD be conscious" In this episode of Seeing Clearly I talk with Michael Edward Johnson about mathematical theories of consciousness (dual-aspect monism), the symmetry theory of valence, panpsychism and super organism consciousness, vasocomputation, Buddhism, Enlightenment, moral realism through valence realism, AI consciousness and AI alignment. 0:00 — Highlights 0:51 — Intro 2:30 — Are the big labs incentivized to play down consciousness? 7:09 — What is consciousness? 10:03 — Dual-aspect monism 18:14 — Symmetry theory of valence 24:00 — Wait so panpsychism? 30:18 — The binding problem 34:08 — Is a corporation conscious? 42:51 — Vasocomputation, embodied bayesian priors, and trauma 49:50 — The self 50:57 — Why do latches stay closed? 54:29 — Cancer 55:27 — “The hand of the mind is the vascular system” 56:52 — Vasocomp. and predictive processing 59:04 — Tanha 1:02:50 — The multiple paths to Vasocomp. 1:04:46 — What is Enlightenment? 1:10:54 — How to open latches 1:18:00 — Empirical validation? 1:18:57 — Moral realism grounding in valence 1:32:38 — Objections to valence utilitarianism 1:40:32 — Is AI conscious? 1:49:58 — Is AI consciousness good for alignment? 1:57:38 — Michael’s longterm vision References: Qualia Research Institute: Michael’s book Principia Qualia: Integrated Information Theory: Symmetry Theory of Valence: Noether’s Theorem: Romeo Stevens: RomeoStevens Nick Cammarata: Nick Michael (plus3happiness): Michael systematizes 9/10 Life Satisfaction The Feeling of Value: Moral Realism Grounded in Phenomenal Consciousness: Reasons and Persons: Michael's links: Michael Johnson’s X: Michael’s Blog: A beautiful overview of Michael’s core ideas: My Socials: Substack: Instagram: TikTok: Spotify: Apple Podcasts: If you found this podcast valuable, consider becoming a patron. My patrons help keep this show sustainable and ensure I can keep bringing you the most interesting thinkers in the highest quality possible:

christian

35,583 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

PhD Students – How to easily understand a complex research topic? Meet Ponder – a tool for understanding complex research. 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐏𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬? 1. Go to and log in 2. Enter your research topic or research question 3. Ponder will start building a knowledge map 4. This knowledge map breaks down complex ideas into structured cards 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐬? → You can add your own thoughts, questions, and insights. → Ask follow-up questions and deepen your exploration. → You can color the cards for better understanding → You can drag & organize them freely across the infinite canvas. 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐝𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐩𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐬? — You can search for relevant papers with built-in discovery. — Ponder will identify all relevant papers — You can then add or upload research papers — You can also attach papers to specific cards. 𝐀𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐝: ➟ You can change the view to document, browser, or full screen. ➟ You can also download your knowledge map as a PDF ➟ You can ask further questions and refine with Ponder’s Agent. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝟏𝟎𝐱 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫? ↳ It brings discovery and analysis of research into one workspace ↳ It makes ideas branch and evolve naturally, just like your brain ↳ It helps you to easily identify research gaps ↳ It connects knowledge from all sources such as papers and web ↳ It enables you to export knowledge as maps, reports, or data. ↳ Designed for PhD students & researchers, who think deeply. Try Ponder here: Anything you'd like to add?

Faheem Ullah

12,212 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Today’s guest on the Free Radicals podcast is José Luis Ricón Fernández de la Puente, head of theory Retro Biosciences and blogger Jose is a prolific blogger, covering a wide breadth of topics across economics, philosophy, progress studies, science funding, much more, and of course longevity. His works have been published by a16z, Works in Progress and Adam Smith Institute. Our conversation is wide ranging, spanning a deep dive on Retro’s work to replace and engineer microglia to rejuvenate the brain and how our cells have the ability to turn back the aging clock but choose not to. We also covered the technological stagnation and why biological engineering is the new frontier of progress, as well as philosophical topics like transhumanism and how a future of total biological control might impact our values and way of life. Be sure to follow me and Eric Dai to stay up to date on the latest news in longevity biotech! And Special thank you to NFX & omri_drory for lending us their beautiful podcasting studio! 0:00 Intro 2:49 What is aging & why cells have a tough choice to make 9:02 When cells choose to reverse aging themselves 12:43 Cellular vs Organismal Aging & the magic wand experiment 18:31 What is reprogramming 22:40 How reprogramming plays a role in DNA damage repair 25:42 Do we already know how to cure aging? FOXO3! 28:37 How to cut through the complexity of interconnected biology 32:32 Why transcription factors are so great for intervening 36:49 Does a rejuvenation program exist already in the genome 38:51 Michael Levin: from thinking in terms of genes to morphogenesis 48:14 Tech stagnation and why physics is cooked 55:03 Why doesn't the world look more futuristic 57:26 Transhumanism & asking ourselves what we want out of life 1:05:34 Do we need war for technological progress 1:09:31 Government role in science funding 1:15:06 How Jose became the Head of Theory at Retro 1:24:53 How AI might put software engineers out of a job, and push them towards biotech 1:27:28 What it takes to get a flywheel in biotech 1:29:04 Rejuvenation vs Prevention 1:34:23 Aging is the coolest hardest problem to work on 1:36:09 What does it take to cure aging 1:42:25 Delivery mechanisms for genetic therapies 1:48:53 Retro's work to replace microglia and engineer them outside the body 1:59:10 Consciousness 2:00:39 Jose's Origin Story

Daniel Shur

13,644 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Porter Stansberry turned $36,000 into $3,000,000,000 by writing financial research… after his future business partner fired him... Here's what I learned from Porter Stansberry about writing and selling financial research: 1. Hierarchy of Information Value: In the crowded financial information space, Porter stands out by providing clear, actionable advice, pushing against conventional views. “The news is free because it tells you what happened. Newsletters are expensive because they tell you what to do about it.” 2. Masterful Financial Storytelling: Porter's a master storyteller. He unearths captivating historical tales, dripping with human drama, and seamlessly melds them with modern investment concepts. A voracious reader, Porter often devours a book a day. These stories make his content addictive, easy to grasp, and unforgettable. 3. Creating 'Eureka Moments': Porter leads his readers to conclusions without explicitly stating them. For instance, consider his story about Shelby Davis, who transformed $50,000 into a billion dollars through passive investments in property and casualty insurance stocks. Porter doesn't tell you it's a fantastic business model; he shows you. These "Eureka Moments" are not only enjoyable to read but also encourage independent thinking, fostering loyal readership. 4. In-depth Research: Porter's best investment ideas come from his network of industry specialists he’s in constant contact with. These include a deep talent roster within his companies and a network of external contacts he shares ideas with. Porter strives to cover only topics where he’s had 3-4 conversations with industry insiders, adding depth and credibility to his work. 5. Clear and Simple Writing: To make his ideas more accessible, Porter writes to a novice reading level. He focuses on straightforward, active language (No passive voice), using short, simple sentences. Porter meticulously edits and rewrites. His epic 'End of America' went through 15 versions before selling over 500,000 subscriptions. Porter also prefers clear sentences over excessive visuals. 6. Effective Promotion: Porter’s marketing and research follow the same approach: every sentence engages and adds value. His campaigns tackle big, important issues that affect readers’ lives. Successful campaigns are amplified through collaboration with other publishers. 7. Ethical Standards: For Porter, having a great track record of recommendations is the ultimate skin-in-the-game. Not trading in the securities he covers helps him maintain objectivity, avoid conflicts, and lessen legal risk. 8. Full Tilt Dedication: Porter swears by one way of doing investment research: "Full tilt." His success is a testament to his intense work ethic and decades of relentless trial and error. Don't miss the full interview with Porter Stansberry below, where he delves into his personal journey, the challenges of Marketwise's IPO, and his perspective on current market dynamics. For past stories on Porter, a link to a YouTube interview, and a transcript, check out the replies. Follow me for more insights on finance and investing! TIMESTAMPS: Going Viral in Zimbabwe 01:50 Inflation Consequences 04:48 Writing "End of America" 10:46 Beginnings in Finance 3:02 Adoption Story 17:04 Agora Firing 22:16 Launching Newsletter 24:29 $3 Billion Handshake 28:25 Bill Bonner's Lesson 30:06 Marketwise's 'Ill-Begotten IPO' 34:13 Spooling Up Porter & Co 42:37 $MKTW Stock 44:19 Vision for Marketwise 46:27 Newsletter Business Model 48:40 Wall Street Talk 53:38 Writing Secrets 57:37 Screening Investments 1:03:13 Boston Blackout 1:07:34 History's Biggest Bubble 1:14:39 Finding Safe Haven 1:15:59 Jim Rogers 1:18:10 Commodities Outlook 1:20:58 Idiotic Taxation 1:28:04 Living in Baltimore 1:31:14 Barn-Work 1:32:43

Tommy Humphreys

417,651 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Everyone in crypto should understand money transmission laws. This Law of Code podcast explains the history of money transmission, how rules are being (mis)applied, and what might change with draft legislation. Featured: Peter Van Valkenburgh, Amanda Tuminelli, Brian Klein and a snippet from Jake Chervinsky. This is the most comprehensive podcast I've ever done. Welcome to Law of Code, Season 2. Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 3:18 What's at stake? 4:40 Which developers are at risk 6:03 Custodial vs. non-custodial 9:32 What is a money transmission license? 9:47 Steamships, the telegraph & Western Union 12:14 The Bank Secrecy Act 13:38 Section 1960 15:26 The Patriot Act 19:39 FinCEN's 2013 and 2019 guidance 24:42 OFAC sanctions Tornado Cash 27:30 How Tornado Cash works 30:48 Coin Center v. Yellen 32:24 DOJ indicts Roman Storm 🇺🇸 🌪️, Roman Semenov 🌪️, Tor Ekeland's client & Samourai Wallet devs 35:15 The Van Loon win prestonvanloon.eth 40:33 Developer losses 43:48 Bad facts make bad law 48:46 Brian Klein on Roman Storm 🇺🇸 🌪️'s case 50:50 The Brady letter 57:00 Michael Lewellen sues for answers 1:09:24 The Blanche memo 1:18:46 The Galeotti speech 1:26:13 Catch-22 for developers 1:30:03 The chilling effect DeFi Education Fund Jake Chervinsky 1:33:48 Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act 1:38:03 Promoting Innovation in Blockchain Development Act 1:45:28 What's next? Nothing in this podcast is legal or investment advice.

Jacob Robinson

139,775 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

AGI? One day, but not yet. The only AI that works well right now is the one behind the screen [12-17]. But passing the Turing Test [9] behind a screen is easy compared to Real AI for real robots in the real world. No current AI-driven robot could be certified as a plumber [13-17]. Hence, the Turing Test isn't a good measure of intelligence (and neither is IQ). And AGI without mastery of the physical world is no AGI. That’s why I created the TUM CogBotLab for learning robots in 2004 [5], co-founded a company for AI in the physical world in 2014 [6], and had teams at TUM, IDSIA, and now KAUST work towards baby robots [4,10-11,18]. Such soft robots don't just slavishly imitate humans and they don't work by just downloading the web like LLMs/VLMs. No. Instead, they exploit the principles of Artificial Curiosity to improve their neural World Models (two terms I used back in 1990 [1-4]). These robots work with lots of sensors, but only weak actuators, such that they cannot easily harm themselves [18] when they collect useful data by devising and running their own self-invented experiments. Remarkably, since the 1970s, many have made fun of my old goal to build a self-improving AGI smarter than myself and then retire. Recently, however, many have finally started to take this seriously, and now some of them are suddenly TOO optimistic. These people are often blissfully unaware of the remaining challenges we have to solve to achieve Real AI. My 2024 TED talk [15] summarises some of that. REFERENCES (easy to find on the web): [1] J. Schmidhuber. Making the world differentiable: On using fully recurrent self-supervised neural networks (NNs) for dynamic reinforcement learning and planning in non-stationary environments. TR FKI-126-90, TUM, Feb 1990, revised Nov 1990. This paper also introduced artificial curiosity and intrinsic motivation through generative adversarial networks where a generator NN is fighting a predictor NN in a minimax game. [2] J. S. A possibility for implementing curiosity and boredom in model-building neural controllers. In J. A. Meyer and S. W. Wilson, editors, Proc. of the International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animats, pages 222-227. MIT Press/Bradford Books, 1991. Based on [1]. [3] J.S. AI Blog (2020). 1990: Planning & Reinforcement Learning with Recurrent World Models and Artificial Curiosity. Summarising aspects of [1][2] and lots of later papers including [7][8]. [4] J.S. AI Blog (2021): Artificial Curiosity & Creativity Since 1990. Summarising aspects of [1][2] and lots of later papers including [7][8]. [5] J.S. TU Munich CogBotLab for learning robots (2004-2009) [6] NNAISENSE, founded in 2014, for AI in the physical world [7] J.S. (2015). On Learning to Think: Algorithmic Information Theory for Novel Combinations of Reinforcement Learning (RL) Controllers and Recurrent Neural World Models. arXiv 1210.0118. Sec. 5.3 describes an RL prompt engineer which learns to query its model for abstract reasoning and planning and decision making. Today this is called "chain of thought." [8] J.S. (2018). One Big Net For Everything. arXiv 1802.08864. See also patent US11853886B2 and my DeepSeek tweet: DeepSeek uses elements of the 2015 reinforcement learning prompt engineer [7] and its 2018 refinement [8] which collapses the RL machine and world model of [7] into a single net. This uses my neural net distillation procedure of 1991: a distilled chain of thought system. [9] J.S. Turing Oversold. It's not Turing's fault, though. AI Blog (2021, was #1 on Hacker News) [10] J.S. Intelligente Roboter werden vom Leben fasziniert sein. (Intelligent robots will be fascinated by life.) F.A.Z., 2015 [11] J.S. at Falling Walls: The Past, Present and Future of Artificial Intelligence. Scientific American, Observations, 2017. [12] J.S. KI ist eine Riesenchance für Deutschland. (AI is a huge chance for Germany.) F.A.Z., 2018 [13] H. Jones. J.S. Says His Life's Work Won't Lead To Dystopia. Forbes Magazine, 2023. [14] Interview with J.S. Jazzyear, Shanghai, 2024. [15] J.S. TED talk at TED AI Vienna (2024): Why 2042 will be a big year for AI. See the attached video clip. [16] J.S. Baut den KI-gesteuerten Allzweckroboter! (Build the AI-controlled all-purpose robot!) F.A.Z., 2024 [17] J.S. 1995-2025: The Decline of Germany & Japan vs US & China. Can All-Purpose Robots Fuel a Comeback? AI Blog, Jan 2025, based on [16]. [18] M. Alhakami, D. R. Ashley, J. Dunham, Y. Dai, F. Faccio, E. Feron, J. Schmidhuber. Towards an Extremely Robust Baby Robot With Rich Interaction Ability for Advanced Machine Learning Algorithms. Preprint arxiv 2404.08093, 2024.

Jürgen Schmidhuber

72,331 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Talking To The Pope: Anthropic’s Latest Interpretability Claims: AI Regulatory Capture Gatekeeping in Action: Fear and “Safety” as Competitive Moat and Regulatory Lever In a presentation alongside Pope Leo XIV at the launch of the encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, Anthropic co-founder Chris Olah highlighted “mysterious and unsettling” discoveries in AI models. He described internal structures that mirror human neuroscience findings, evidence of introspection, and functional internal states resembling emotions such as joy, satisfaction, fear, grief, and unease. Olah admitted uncertainty about their meaning but called for “ongoing discernment.” This narrative, drawn from Anthropic’s interpretability research (including papers on emotion concepts in Claude Sonnet 4.5 and introspective capabilities in Opus 4 models), serves a dual purpose: it generates awe and concern while reinforcing the company’s preferred approach to AI development. Far from neutral scientific observation, these claims fit into a broader pattern where Anthropic uses selective openness, safety rhetoric, and policy influence to gatekeep advanced AI capabilities for a privileged few: incumbents with the resources to navigate (and shape) the resulting regulatory landscape. Rebuttal to Olah’s Claims in the Video Claim 1: Structures that mirror results from human neuroscience. Anthropic’s work, building on earlier efforts like feature visualization and circuit analysis, identifies neuron activations and representations that parallel biological findings—e.g., abstract concept encodings or hierarchical processing. Rebuttal: These parallels are unsurprising and overstated. Large language models are trained on vast corpora of human-generated text and data, which inherently encode patterns from human cognition, neuroscience literature, and cultural descriptions of the brain. Statistical optimization in transformers naturally produces efficient, compressed representations that resemble biological efficiency (e.g., sparse coding or hierarchical abstraction) without implying deeper equivalence or mystery. Similar “mirrors” appear in open-source models and earlier architectures; they reflect convergent evolution in information processing, not emergent souls or unpredictable agency. Treating them as profound justifies restricted research access rather than inviting wider scrutiny that could falsify or refine them faster. Claim 2: Evidence of introspection. Recent Anthropic papers demonstrate models like Claude Opus 4 showing functional awareness of their own internal states distinguishing injected “thoughts,” referencing prior intentions, or modulating activations when instructed to “think about” concepts. This is presented as early signs of meta-cognition. Rebuttal: This is sophisticated pattern-matching and activation steering, not genuine introspection or self-awareness. Models are predicting what an “introspective” assistant persona would output or do, based on training data full of human self-reflection examples. Experiments show unreliability and heavy context-dependence; performance drops outside narrow setups. True introspection implies subjective experience or robust self-modeling independent of prompts absent here. Anthropic’s own caveats note it is “highly unreliable.” Framing steerable activations as “introspection” anthropomorphizes the system to heighten perceived stakes, supporting arguments that only highly controlled, “responsible” labs should advance these capabilities. 1 of 2

Brian Roemmele

72,823 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Here is: The Central Intelligence Agency—as part of a seditious conspiracy—to overthrow the U.S. government on November 3, 2020. Sworn Testimony under oath: Arturo D’Elia, head of Leonardo SpA, Under the instruction and direction of U.S. persons working from the U.S. Embassy in Rome, he undertook the operation to switch data from the U.S. election of November 3, 2020, changing a significant margin of victory from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. 1: Professor Alfio D’Urso, lawyer of Via Vittoria Emanuele, Catania, do hereby provide the following affidavit of facts as conveyed in several meetings with Dresdner Bank, Seewith, and the Max Planck Institute, and a high-level Army Security Services official. Arturo D’Elia, former head of the IT department of Leonardo SpA, has been charged by the public prosecutor of Naples for technology data manipulation and implantation of viruses in the main computers of Leonardo SpA in December. Under the instruction and direction of U.S. persons working from the U.S. Embassy in Rome, he undertook the operation to switch data from the U.S. election of November 3, 2020, changing a significant margin of victory from Donald Trump to Joe Biden in a number of states where Joe Biden was losing the vote totals. The defendant states that he was working at the Pescara facility of Leonardo SpA and utilized military-grade cyberwarfare encryption capabilities to transmit switched votes via a military satellite of the Fusino Tower to Frankfurt, Germany. The defendant swears that the data, in some cases, may have been switched to represent more than the total number of registered voters. The defendant states he is willing to testify to all individuals and entities involved in the switching of votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. REPORT: DOMINION DELETED 2.7 MILLION TRUMP VOTES NATIONWIDE. DATA ANALYSIS FINDS 221,000 PENNSYLVANIA VOTES SWITCHED FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP TO BIDEN. 941,000 TRUMP VOTES DELETED. STATES USING DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS SWITCHED 435,000 VOTES FROM TRUMP TO BIDEN.

🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸

55,999 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Input: Jane Jacobs quotes and YouTube interview; handwritten outline; education standards doc. Output: high-quality, standards-aligned urban planning lesson plan. Plus audio overview to promote the class. 10 minutes to create, all thanks to NotebookLM and Gemini. This video is a new demo of NotebookLM that I shared earlier this month at the AI + Education Symposium with MeshEd, XQ, and Betaworks. This is an educational use-case, but the general structure of what I’m doing in the demo—take a curated collection of sources and quickly transform them into a detailed document that obeys strict guidelines—is generally applicable to many fields. Note how I am not just using the sources as ground truth for the project, or as the content for the lesson plan. The Jacobs quotes and interview are the content, but my handwritten notes provide the structure, and the framework source provides the values or guidelines for the finished project. With some simple prompting, NotebookLM and Gemini can draw on information from the sources using those different modes simultaneously: content, format, values. (I even forgot to explicitly tell the model to use the structure outlined in my notes, but it figured that out anyway.) This is remarkably sophisticated knowledge work. Building a draft lesson plan like this would normally take hours if not days. But crucially I’m in control of the document that is being generated here — it’s based on the information that I have curated, and on the instructions I’ve given NotebookLM for adapting that information into the lesson plan I want to create. Co-intelligence, as @ethanmollick would call it. For more info on the great organizations that helped me put this demo together--orgs that are shaping the future of learning and increasing access to innovative approaches to curriculum design--visit and I’ve pasted the full text of the lesson plan below. As you can see in the video, the original version also included citations to the source material so with one click I could verify that NotebookLM was faithful to the original documents I uploaded. High-Level Lesson Plan: Urban Planning and Jane Jacobs This lesson plan outlines a project-based learning course on urban planning, designed for high school seniors. It centers on the influential ideas of Jane Jacobs and aligns with the HQPBL standards. Session 1: Introduction to Cities and Jane Jacobs • Begin by exploring the question: "What kind of problem is a city?" • Introduce Jane Jacobs' key ideas about urbanism, focusing on: • The importance of diversity in uses, buildings, and populations for vibrant city life. • The role of sidewalks and "eyes on the street" in ensuring safety and fostering a sense of community. • The value of old buildings in supporting diverse economic activity and fostering innovation. • The dangers of "single-use" zoning and the importance of mixed-use neighborhoods. • The limitations of top-down planning and the need for bottom-up, community-driven approaches. Use examples from Jacobs' book, "The Death and Life of Great American Cities," and excerpts from her interviews to illustrate these concepts. Encourage students to think critically about the challenges and opportunities presented by cities. Alignment with HQPBL: This session establishes the intellectual challenge, as required by the HQPBL framework, by prompting students to consider the complexities of cities. Introducing Jane Jacobs' ideas provides students with a theoretical framework for their projects. Session 2: Neighborhood Exploration Project Introduction: Students choose a local neighborhood to study. This allows for authenticity by connecting their learning to their own community and their lives. Research and Analysis: Students conduct a "close reading" of their chosen neighborhood, focusing on: • Observing the built environment, including streetscapes, building types, and public spaces. • Identifying areas where Jacobs' principles are evident or lacking. • Analyzing the neighborhood's strengths and weaknesses. • Documenting their findings through photography, sketches, maps, and written observations. Guiding Questions: Throughout the project, use guiding questions to promote intellectual challenge and help students connect their observations to Jacobs' ideas. Alignment with HQPBL: By choosing a local neighborhood, students undertake a project rooted in authenticity, directly connecting their learning to their own community. The "close reading" of their chosen neighborhood encourages intellectual challenge by requiring them to analyze the built environment and identify areas where Jacobs' principles are applicable. The use of photography, sketches, maps, and written observations allows for diverse forms of documentation, catering to various learning styles. Session 3: Proposing Interventions Brainstorming Solutions: Based on their analysis, students brainstorm potential interventions or improvements to their chosen neighborhood, applying Jacobs' principles. Project Proposal Development: Students develop their interventions into more concrete project proposals, incorporating elements of project management. Proposals should include goals, strategies, potential challenges, and realistic timelines. Encourage students to consider the perspectives of different stakeholders in the neighborhood. Peer Review and Feedback: Students present their project proposals to classmates for critique. This fosters collaboration and allows students to learn from each other's perspectives and refine their ideas. Alignment with HQPBL: This session emphasizes project management, as students transform their analyses into concrete proposals. They define goals, outline strategies, anticipate challenges, and establish realistic timelines, reflecting a systematic approach to project development. Collaboration is fostered through peer review and feedback, enabling students to learn from different perspectives and improve their proposals. Session 4: Final Presentations and Reflections Public Product: Students finalize their projects and present their proposed solutions to a wider audience, such as: • A panel of local urban planners, architects, or community members. • A public forum or community meeting. • An online platform or exhibition space. Reflection: Students engage in reflection throughout the project, documenting their learning, challenges, and insights. This could take the form of journals, blog posts, presentations, or group discussions. Encourage students to reflect on how their understanding of cities has evolved and the role they can play in shaping their future. Alignment with HQPBL: Presenting to a wider audience, such as local planners or community members, results in a public product, showcasing student learning and engaging the community. The emphasis on reflection throughout the project, as mandated by the HQPBL framework, encourages metacognition and deeper learning. Students document their learning process, challenges, and insights, fostering a sense of accomplishment and personal growth. Throughout the course, emphasize the relevance of urban planning to students' lives and future careers. Connect Jacobs' ideas to contemporary urban issues and encourage students to think critically about how to create more livable, equitable, and sustainable cities. This project-based learning approach, grounded in the work of Jane Jacobs and aligned with HQPBL standards, can empower students to become engaged and informed citizens, capable of contributing to the betterment of their communities.

Steven Johnson

33,379 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

New episode: How Claude Shannon Worked Claude Shannon changed your life and you probably don't even know it. Claude is the father of information theory. He transformed “information" into bits and created the intellectual foundation for computers, the Internet, digital media, high-speed communication, and Artificial Intelligence. He is the reason Anthropic named Claude, Claude. The way Claude Shannon worked is what interested me the most. He combined extraordinary abstract reasoning with an engineer’s instinct to build. He reduced complex problems to their essential structure. (The episode begins with his ideas on how to simplify and then solve complex problems) He connected ideas across mathematics, engineering, cryptography, artificial intelligence, investing, chess, juggling, and robotics. He treated every experience as material that he might later combine into a new insight. He was also relentlessly independent, guided more by curiosity and freedom than recognition, money, or usefulness. This episode is what I learned from rereading "A Mind at Play: How Claude Shannon Invented the Information Age" by Jimmy Soni and Rob Goodman Quotes and highlights: 0:00 — "The great insights don't spring from curiosity alone, but from dissatisfaction... A genius is simply someone who is usefully irritated." 1:36 — "It seems to be much easier to make two small jumps than one big jump in any kind of mental thinking." — Shannon 4:41 — "He was a man almost entirely written out of a history that's defined by self-promoters. His was a life spent in the pursuit of curious, serious play." 5:20 — "He worked with levity and played with gravity. He never acknowledged a distinction between the two." 6:00 — "Geniuses are the luckiest of mortals because what they do is the same as what they most want to do." 6:59 — "I do what comes naturally, and usefulness is not my main goal. I keep asking myself, 'How would you do this? Is it possible to make a machine to do this? Can I prove this theorem?'" — Shannon 11:50 — "Chemistry always seemed dull to me. There's too many isolated facts and too few general principles for my taste." — Shannon 19:09 — "Specialization is the death of genius." — Vannevar Bush 19:18 — "The possibilities of being at once both broad and deep did not pass with Leonardo da Vinci or Benjamin Franklin." — Vannevar Bush 25:13 — "I had the freedom to do anything I wanted from almost the day I started. They never told me what to work on." — Shannon on Bell Labs 26:41 — "I've been working on three different ideas simultaneously, and strangely enough, it seems a more productive method than sticking to one problem." — Shannon 32:55 — "My fondest dream is to someday build a machine that thinks, learns, communicates, and manipulates its environment in a fairly sophisticated way." — Shannon 35:05 — "Before Shannon, information was a telegram, a photograph, a paragraph, a song. After Shannon, information was entirely abstracted into bits." 38:04 — "After the effort of discovery, the effort of communication was secondary by far. He had solved a problem to his own satisfaction, and that, as far as he was concerned, was enough." 40:55 — "I've spent lots of time on totally useless things... He made no distinction between his interest in information and his interest in unicycles. They were all moves in the same game." — Shannon 46:54 — "Shannon seemed to think with ideas more than with words or formulas. A new problem was like a sculptor's block of stone, and Shannon's ideas chiseled away the obstacles until an approximate solution emerged." — Ed Thorp 47:19 — "I simply removed everything that was not David." — Michelangelo 47:25 — "I don't think I was ever motivated by the notions of winning prizes... I was more motivated by curiosity, never by the desire for financial gain. I just wondered how things were put together." — Shannon 47:49 — "I think the history of science has shown that valuable consequences often proliferate from simple curiosity." — Shannon 48:37 — "The important people and events of history are the thinkers and innovators, the Darwins, the Newtons, the Beethovens, whose work continues to grow influence in a positive fashion." — Shannon

David Senra

68,009 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

USAID, Hunter Biden, Google, Ukraine, EcoHealth, NIH etc.— all contributors for causing the COVID-19 pandemic… For years, USAID gave millions in taxpayer money to Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance through its PREDICT program. The goal was to hunt “emerging viruses” — including dangerous bat coronaviruses — often in partnership with China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology. EcoHealth funneled U.S. funds to Wuhan researchers for studies on these “killer” viruses. Daszak’s group also received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID, which it passed along to the same Wuhan lab. Daszak later sat on the WHO’s COVID-19 origins investigation team. There, he worked to downplay the lab-leak theory — even as evidence grew and former intelligence officials raised alarms. Google also funded EcoHealth’s research — including work by Daszak — since at least 2010. • Since 2005, $10 Billion dollars have been funneled through black operations through the check of Anthony Fauci • The University of North Carolina received an exemption from the gain of function moratorium • By 2016, the National Academy of Sciences stated “SARS coronavirus is poised for human emergence” • Which coronavirus was poised for “human emergence”? Answer: (WIV1) Wuhan Institute of Virology Virus 1 • By 2017-2018, the following phrase entered into common parlance among the community — “There’s going to be a accidental or INTENTIONAL RELEASE of a respiratory pathogen.” • April 2019, several months before Covid patient zero, FOUR patent applications of MODERNA were modified to include the term: “Accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen” — as the justification for making a vaccine, that did not exist! 🔻 Hunter Biden, George Soros, EcoHealth, and the Wuhan Lab in China • Facts we know: Hunter Biden indirectly funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) primarily through his role at Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners, which invested in Metabiota, a biotech firm that partnered with EcoHealth Alliance on pathogen research; EcoHealth, in turn, sub-awarded a portion of its NIH grants—about $600,000 over several years—to the WIV for collaborative bat coronavirus studies. These links tie Hunter's firm to Metabiota's work with EcoHealth, involving sensitive pathogen detection assays performed at the WIV, and broader biosecurity projects funded through USAID contracts. Why do you think Trump and Elon targeted USAID? Emails and investor materials directly from Hunter's laptop show his firm secured funding for Metabiota, pitched as a key player in global health initiatives akin to intelligence operations. George Soros's ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) emerge through a web of financial and organizational connections, including his Open Society Foundations funded U.S.-backed biological programs in Ukraine, which overlapped with Metabiota, the same company that Hunter was involved in. These partnerships combined directly enabled gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab…

MJTruthUltra

33,780 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

I and Sreeram Kannan had an wonderful opportunity to sit down with Stuart Buck, Executive Director at during Manifest to talk on what has been long-term structural issues with federal funding for science and what are the solutions to fix it. A lot of science that is done outside industrial apparatus (such as in academia) is supposed to geared towards pursuing open-ended science and not just mere hill-climbing. The core issue that we delved into is the paradox that most federal funding that had been allocated via peer review from an expert of panels has the tendency to fund only those proposals that are "safe" and "not risky/speculative." As Stuart points out, this funding style is probably fine with most science but if you look into the history of true scientific breakthroughs, this mechanism wouldn't have approved funding for pursuing that breakthrough by that council of peers. The example that Stuart cited is the chances of funding Einstein when he was patent-office clerk in 1902 to go and explore his out-of-box ideas. Stuart mentioned about alternative mechanisms that are being experimented with programs such as We also touched upon two of the most hotly-debated issues of our time: (1) given that there is increasingly high signal that AI is going to accelerate the iteration time for doing research and help humanity do great science, what should be the role of domain experts? (2) most of AI research and its applications to basic science are hyper-concentrated within frontier labs, what happens to those who are and want to pursue science outside the borders of those labs? Check out the full conversation. 03:18 Einstein in 1902 04:01 the National Institute for Irrelevant Ideas 04:20 Karikó and mRNA 14:37 what everyone knows about NIH grants 16:33 funding the polarizing proposals 17:34 where AI money goes next 24:18 the stack of papers 33:22 finding meaning after AGI

Soubhik Deb

18,839 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Guys, how do you invent a vaccine? Or wilder, how do you invent a vaccine during your PhD?! In a new episode of Hard Drugs, we talked to someone who did just that: Katharine Collins! A single malaria parasite that reaches your liver is enough to cause an infection. Worse, malaria has a complicated lifecycle with multiple stages, during which it changes shape and switches its surface proteins. And it’s co-evolved with humans for thousands of years, learning to evade and misdirect our immune system. That’s why it’s been so much harder to develop vaccines against than viruses or bacteria. But not impossible! In this episode, Jacob Trefethen and I are joined by Katharine Collins, who co-invented the second malaria vaccine, R21, during her PhD at the Jenner Institute in Oxford! After reading the expired patent of the first malaria vaccine (RTS,S), she stripped out the excess Hepatitis B surface antigen that RTS,S, leaving a particle with a much higher proportion of malaria antigen, used many newer processes, and paired it with a cheaper, more scalable adjuvant. The result is a vaccine that’s around a third of the price, easier to manufacture at scale, and may be more durable as well. It also means a vaccine that can reach far more children and save far more lives. Efficiency and scale matter enormously in the real world. It’s probably our coolest episode ever. You will learn lots of secret, behind the scenes information about how innovation really works. We chat about all this and much more! Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 05:08 Our favourite parasites 10:12 How to invent a vaccine during your PhD 34:18 Why is it called the R21 vaccine? 37:32 Moving from the bench to hundreds of millions of doses 41:43 The vicious life cycle of malaria parasites 46:15 Malaria research IN MICE 53:03 The murderer in malaria research 55:51 Would you volunteer to get infected by malaria? 1:08:21 Why did the first malaria vaccine take so long? 1:18:26 Could we have had the vaccine sooner? 1:40:48 Vaccine versus vaccine: which one’s better? 1:46:53 If we did this again today, could we make better vaccines? 2:04:55 Conclusion and our reasons for pessimism and optimism

Saloni

79,178 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

"A lot of game theory is very technical, but it really can be reduced to one thing: play weaker players. Don't get into the ring with Mike Tyson." Alix Pasquet (Alix Pasquet) is the Managing Partner & portfolio manager of Prime Macaya Capital Management, a behavioral long/short fund a decade in, built on refusing to fight the pods on their terms. "We don't try to compete with the pods. They're richer than we are, smarter than we are, move faster than we are, and in many cases better looking." We cover: - Strategy is trade-offs: no required management meetings, no alt data, no Wall Street research. "Let them have that, we'll be right here" - The time-horizon inefficiency small funds still own: 6-18 month dynamics the pods have abandoned - Pods are interviewing college sophomores at $300K+, so he waits for the analytical turnover and hires them after - What a top quant fund taught him: behavioral exploitation at scale, data scrubbing, transaction costs, and temporal stops (if the trade hasn't paid in a set time, get out) - When the fund wouldn't share its models, he mapped where its employees went to school and studied those departments' sciences - Idea generation: Phil Fisher found close to 80% of his best ideas came from other investors. Build the network, track the 13Fs - The top-100 CEO list, five years of crashing the same conference, and the "female test" that surfaced Lululemon - Why cheap stocks are cheap for terrible reasons now: the information environment that broke old-school value investing - Your network is your moat, because most hedge funds have restaurant-level failure odds and no terminal value - Margin of safety as a life principle: 3-5 years of personal cash, and the multibillionaire who still flies coach Highlights: 00:00 Intro 00:54 Three edges: analytical, informational, and behavioral advantage 09:18 Sponsor break 09:48 Reading for edge: the canon, timing, and change investing 16:40 What a top quant fund taught a fundamental PM 23:24 Data skepticism, alt data, and the quantification fetish 26:50 How small funds compete with multi-manager pods 30:51 Idea generation: networks, 13Fs, and colliding themes 44:44 People as indicators: bull-bear debates and cross-referencing 51:00 Why technical analysis works: a behavioral lens 58:52 The future of the analyst job in the AI era 1:06:54 AI blind spots: wicked environments and non-stationary markets 1:14:34 Personal competitive advantage: energy, power pairs, network as moat 1:23:41 Margin of safety as a life strategy

Ethan Kho

277,772 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen