"They are what the Gauls were: Fierce and fickle."
A virgin has sex with a fully realistic sex robot. Are they still a virgin, and does it depend on their sex?
0%M still virgin, F not
0%F still virgin, M not
80%both virgins
20%both not virgins
5 votes • Final resultsIf there were sex robots that were made to look like animals, would having sex with them be the same as bestiality?
41%yes
59%no
22 votes • Final resultsNot sure how well alignment is going to go when the normal human view of God is someone who'll torture you for eternity for disobedience
At long last we have created the 'AI that can create a super virus to destroy humanity' from the classic book... actually there's no book because no sci-fi writer was cynical enough to believe anyone was that stupid
Today we announced the Claude-led discovery of a molecular machine that we suspect could represent a new gene editing mechanism. Its precise function, biotechnological utility (if any), or level of significance is not yet clear, but at minimum it is work I would have been proud to do as a PhD student. The work was done mostly, though not entirely, by Claude: our life sciences team suggested a broad area of research, Claude read through the literature and a bunch of genome data and discovered something interesting, then Claude proposed experiments to verify the discovery and our team carried them out.
It’s easy to dismiss this as a one-off or curiosity, but we’ve repeatedly seen a pattern where AI performance in new intellectual domains goes from weak to superhuman in a matter of a few years. In 2023 models struggled to do math at the level of an average high-school student. In 2024 they started to do well on math competitions for the best high-schoolers in the country, in 2025 they started to solve minor open problems, in early 2026 more significant open problems, and in late 2026 they are beginning to solve the top few open problems in all of mathematics. We believe AI for biology is on a similar exponential trend.
The main difference between biology and mathematics, of course, is that math can be done purely theoretically, while biology requires experimentation. Some have used this to draw the conclusion that AI’s utility in biology will be limited. We think this is wrong. As we’ve demonstrated today, humans can collaborate with AI to perform the experiments, validate key results in a few weeks and, if necessary, work with the AI to iterate on what they find. Eventually it may even be possible for Claude itself to safely perform the experiments by autonomously controlling lab equipment, with appropriate safeguards in place, but we aren’t doing that today (our lab is also a BSL1/BSL2 facility that doesn't handle materials dangerous to humans).
More broadly, biomedical advancement has many stages — from fundamental biology discoveries, to translational research, to drug discovery, clinical trials, and finally the actual delivery of medicines and health care to patients. We are also interested in these later stages, but even simply accelerating the first stage of fundamental biological discoveries has the potential to speed up and broaden the entire pipeline. Improving our understanding of biology and sharpening biologists’ tools can drive forward all of the later stages, for example by identifying new drug targets, finding new therapeutic modalities, allowing for more precise measurement, and speeding up the experimental loop which itself further accelerates our understanding of biology. This will not in itself speed up clinical trial times, but if it succeeds it could greatly increase the number of promising candidates that go into the pipeline — an increase in throughput even though latency remains.
In Machines of Loving Grace, I wrote about AI’s potential to “cure most diseases in 5-10 years” — a goal that sounds impossible, but one I believe is just barely possible if AI is applied to every stage of the pipeline. The first step is showing that AI can first help with, and then drive, biological discoveries.
Claude’s discovery is the latest in a line of related prior work that goes back decades, beginning with systems like CRISPR, and continuing with discoveries like the bridge recombinase and VIPR in the past few years. Recently, there has been heightened interest in systems based on reverse transcriptase (RT) enzymes, the enzyme underlying the system Claude identified. And most recently, a Stanford team working independently described a novel RT system with an associated non-coding array that is in some ways similar to the one Claude found, though they are distinct systems that evolved independently from each other. I believe that we’re at the very beginning of finding such systems and developing them into powerful tools for biotechnology.
I’m proud of the resources Anthropic has invested in accelerating the public benefits of AI through the life sciences, and we’re aiming both to grow our life sciences team and to work with other scientists to extend this approach to a broad range of problems. If you have a proposal for a research collaboration or are interested in joining our life sciences team, please reach out.
I'd find this totally unsurprising tbh
🚨#BREAKING: Rep. Lauren Boebert is accused in a sworn House ethics complaint of having lesbian affairs with 2 female staffers under her supervision.
Close your eyes. Picture a baby. What does he have? Nothing special. Full set of teeth. He does something ordinary like catching and eating a mouse. Now open your eyes. Who are you picturing? A white male baby? Wrong, that was a female baby of color. Surprised? Shame on you
I suspect a lot of the people who seem absolutely certain that the call for AI regulation is baseless and only about regulatory capture would have called the things we've already seen AI do "alarmist science fiction" 5 years ago
Niece: Why do you get more ice cream and I don't?!
Me: I'm bigger
Niece: I'm still growing! You're dying!
Angra Mainyu retweeted
Attempting to deduce subject of biography from this index. Faint hunch it isn't Philip Larkin.
The voodoo guy in Child's Play be like "How dare you use my 'transfer your soul into another body to cheat death' spell for evil purposes!"
How much reggae does one have to listen to before one can tell the difference between literally any two singers?
I don't know how anyone can use Fable. I literally cannot ask a question that's innocuous enough to not trip it's safeguards
People who would press it are vastly underestimating how much of civilization would suddenly start failing without smart people running it behind the scenes
None of these conclusions seem implausible to me at all. Just because we lack the capability to do it with humans doesn't make it implicitly incompatible with consciousness















