Related posts

Programmer; makes Handmade Hero and teaches Performance-Aware Programming, and argues loudly about how software got slow.

• Our readingkorrents.com

  Refusing to write code with AI can be a philosophical decision rather than a productivity one: the reason to program something is that you want to program it.

  Their words

  it's more about what do you want to do? Like what why are you spending this time, right? It's a philosophical question, not a productivity question.

  youtube.com

Co-founded Neuralink and founded Science Corp, which is building a retinal implant; writes about neural interfaces and biology.

• Our readingkorrents.com

  Consciousness is a practical problem rather than a philosophical one: given a brain-computer interface that could read and drive every neuron, we would work it out quickly.

  Their words

  Now, if we had a tech if we had a magical BCI that allowed me to see the instant state of every neuron in the brain and and drive them, I think we'd figure out consciousness pretty fast. I don't think I think this is a practical problem, not a philosophical problem.

  Max Hodak: Average Is Not Good Enoughyoutube.com

Economist at George Mason University, co-author of Marginal Revolution, host of Conversations with Tyler. Writes in short, dense claims about economics, culture and AI, and has moved position on AI in public more than once.

• Recommendsrcmnd.app

  Open Socrates: The Case for a Philosophical Life

  Their words

  Agnes Callard, Open Socrates: The Case for a Philosophical Life

  marginalrevolution.com

Co-founder and CEO of Google DeepMind, and a 2024 Nobel laureate in Chemistry for the protein-structure work behind AlphaFold.

• Our readingkorrents.com

  A model that can predict the next frames of a video coherently understands the world, in the only sense of the word that is doing any work.

  Their words

  I think to the extent that it can predict the next frames in a coherent way, that is a form of understanding, not in the anthropomorphic version of, it's not some kind of deep philosophical understanding of what's going on, I don't think these systems have that, but they certainly have modeled enough of the dynamics, put it that way

  youtube.com

Psychiatrist and clinical assistant professor at Case Western Reserve University. Writes Psychiatry at the Margins on the philosophical and scientific arguments inside psychiatry and the psy-sciences.

• Readrcmnd.app

  How Does the Psychiatrist Know?: On the Epistemology of Psychiatric Diagnostic Reasoning

  Their words

  Recently I reviewed Adrian Kind’s 2025 book, “How Does the Psychiatrist Know?: On the Epistemology of Psychiatric Diagnostic Reasoning,” on this substack. I had mentioned that Kind’s book is the first systematic, in-depth, book-length philosophical investigation into how psychiatrists arrive at their diagnostic conclusions.

  psychiatrymargins.com

Writer and former McKinsey/BCG strategy consultant; author of The Pathless Path and Good Work, about leaving the default career track. Publishes the Boundless newsletter and podcast.

• Recommendsrcmnd.app

  The Sovereign Artist: Meditations on Lifestyle Design

  Their words

  A collection of short essays and aphorisms on crafting a life of autonomy, creativity, and intentional leisure—challenging hustle culture with elegance and philosophical depth.

  pathlesspath.com

Theoretical physicist and philosopher, Homewood Professor of Natural Philosophy at Johns Hopkins and fractal faculty at the Santa Fe Institute. Writes the Preposterous Universe blog and hosts the Mindscape podcast.

From one piece Sean Carroll: General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Black Holes & Aliens | Lex Fridman Podcast #428 2 beliefs, in the piece's order there

• Our readingkorrents.com

  There is no philosophical knockout objection to the simulation hypothesis, and also no reason whatsoever to take it seriously.

  Their words

  I don’t think that there’s any philosophical knockout objection to the simulation hypothesis. I also think that there’s absolutely no reason to take it seriously.

  youtube.com

• Our readingkorrents.com

  The story that Einstein could not keep up with quantum mechanics is almost exactly backwards: his philosophical objections were correct and should have been taken far more seriously.

  Their words

  I think that that story about the latter part is completely wrong, almost 180 degrees wrong. I think that Einstein understood quantum mechanics as well as anyone, at least up through the 1930s. I think that his philosophical objections to it are correct. He should actually have been taken much more seriously about that.

  youtube.com