Claude Opus 5.5 drew every frame of this animation in JavaScript. Everyone in town sends Claude their requests, but one girl sends a question instead: "What do you love?"

A game dev secret nobody tells you is that approximately half of dev time per day is the dev staring at the screen thinking deeply about how to design or program something and not actually doing anything.

They deleted most of a mouse's cortex before it was born, filled the empty skull with human neurons, and the mouse walked, learned and remembered doi.org/10.1038/s41586-026-1…

Europe needs euromaximalism. It is much more than just European federalism. Deep down, it's the uncomfortable realisation that in a world reorganising around power, only those with power get to decide. And in the new 21st century, power operates at continental scale. Together, European countries are a powerful civilisation. Separately, they are a collection of small to medium-sized countries negotiating from weakness how much of a tithe to pay to a foreign overlord. The choice is simple. Unity and power, or division and vassalage.

A few days ago people screeched that: “Canada couldn’t get offered a great deal as associate membership wasn’t a thing” Today the EU announced they’d like to explore that offer. AND, I’ve got the rough motivator terms that both sides are looking at for the deal: As I said Article 217 TFEU, allows the EU to make any “association agreement” it wants. In-session discussions of Article 217 have noted that this can be up to “new classes of membership” that “do not compel the regular membership requirements” So while previous AA agreements were not memberships, one for Canada could be offered. The EU wants: 1) A stable trade partner with natural resources. 2) To enact the free trade that’s been blocked by some member states who didn’t ratify CETA. 3) To develop new manufacturing suppliers as EU space is tapped out and they don’t want to depend on China. 4) Defence manufacturing providers that are not US based. 5) Arctic stability and surveillance. 6) Accelerated tourist visa waivers for EU tourists, and accelerated review for EU skilled immigration (not open border) 7) European companies having access to Canadian markets and exchange listings as if they were Canadian. 8) Accelerated review of EU food and medical products by Health Canada for approved access to the Canadian market. 9) Canada’s development banks to be able to access and own projects in the EU that it deems inline with its investment mandate. 10) EU pension funds and wealth funds to be able to invest in Canada with preferred tax rules. Canada would get: 1) Free movement for Canadian’s to live and work in the EU. 2) The right for Canadian companies to sell to EU government procurement as if they were European. 3) The right for Canadian defence providers to provide services to EU governments and militaries including in classified settings. 4) Free trade with Europe. 5) Canadian financial institutions having access to SEPA and other European transfer networks, improving Canadian banking competition. 6) The ability for Canadians and Canadian companies to sell to Europeans or invest in Europe without foreign buyer taxes. 7) Canadian products being eligible for EU tax credit rebates when sold in the EU. 8) The ability for Canadian companies to manufacture in Europe without repatriation tariffs. All **WITHOUT**: -Open borders in Canada -Adopting the Euro -Being bound by the EU commission -Adopting Brussels oversight or policy Now this is the starting point for each of the sides, the negotiations may water down or remove some points, or introduce new asks. But both sides want very different things, that are *hugely* beneficial to both. Yet Canada clearly comes out on top of this deal because they have the valuable primary industry that Europe needs and so would get potentially the lightest requirement offer that Europe has ever put forth. While the EU seems to have acknowledged that because of the difference in scale, they can’t expect Canada to have fully open borders, or markets. If Carney lands this plane, it would be historic.

You are always one decision away from a different life

I'm reading about how likely it is that AI leads to human extinction or permanent human disempowerment, and it's pretty crazy. In one large survey of AI researchers, the median estimate was 5% for that kind of outcome, if I'm understanding correctly. Just think about how crazy that figure is! I know these estimates are disputed, but given the stakes, even a 1% figure should be an alarm bell. We absolutely need to be giving way more attention to this issue.