so why the hell would idealistic leading researchers join meta of all places besides pure cash? i think zuck’s pitch likely includes: - data, more human behavioral data than any other entity. it’s the closest proxy to “training on humanity” without breaking laws. -

Dr. Harvey Cushing museum at Yale. He founded modern brain surgery, meticulously collected and preserved hundreds of brains ( ~100yo now in jars in the pic). He trained at Harvard, later becoming chief of surgery and a professor there. He saved ~ a thousand brain cancer patients

Just a reminder that you can build a lot of different things with AI, and some of them can clearly help the world & some of them are going to make the world worse. In addition to AI labs and AI users having responsibility for outcomes, all you builders and startup folks do, too.

say what you want about zuck, but bro is playing 4D chess like nobody else here are zuck’s top 5 strategic moves, ranked from impactful to genius-level 👇

we are cooking 🧑‍🍳

At the end of the day, the SWE-bench leaderboard on swebench dot com is probably the most clear description of current model performance on this benchmark. No "verified" subset, limited tool use (bash only), most scaffolding is open to see. In this benchmark, the Claude 4 Opus

Happy Halloween! Happy to have the coolest PI! (late because I was submitting a paper) 👀

Social media tends to frame AI debate into two caricatures: (A) Skeptics who think LLMs are doomed and AI is a bunch of hype. (B) Fanatics who think we have all the ingredients and superintelligence is imminent. But if you read what leading researchers actually say (beyond the

👨‍🍳