rish retweeted
Pavements. It comes back to pavements and garbage.
Simple problem to fix - and suddenly Indian cities will stop looking so bad at the ground level.
You can add traffic and air pollution to the wish list of problems to fix, but that may take time.
Pavements can literally be fixed in a few months.
Ethiopia capital, in a country with a GDP per capita of just $1,000, fun fact. Almost 50% of its population lacks access to electricity, and its HDI is worse than Bihar’s, yet its capital still mogs our Tier-1 cities. 😭😭
Our cities are our PR to the world, and we’re doing almost nothing to fix them.
Ethiopia’s capital PR > India PR.
rish retweeted
i gave 5.6 sol access to my camera roll and had it extract pictures of every piece of clothing i own from my photos
then, told it to find new outfits for me and render them on me with gpt-image!
its kinda cool to see your entire wardrobe in a collection like this
rish retweeted
Five cancers that used to be death sentences. Pancreatic. Glioblastoma. Triple-negative breast. Renal. Melanoma. The median survival for metastatic pancreatic cancer is still 6 months. Glioblastoma, 15 months.
Now personalized mRNA vaccines are producing complete remissions in some of these patients. Not responses. Remissions.
BioNTech’s pancreatic cancer vaccine has 6-year follow-up data. 8 of 16 patients who mounted an immune response are still alive. For a cancer that kills 95% of patients within 5 years, that's incredible.
Topol’s pyramid here maps the trajectory. From broad checkpoint inhibitors at the base to personalized neoantigen vaccines at the peak. The technology is climbing.
What absolute shambles. This is a national shame, both for how our athletes are trained and their psychology, and the law & order condition in UP that’s been a joke for far too long. indiatoday.in/india/story/ch…
For all the measures regulated by the EU I’m surprised they don’t force airlines to allow you to cancel extras you paid for but no longer need or want to change (like baggage). @ryanair @eurowings if I pre purchased a lighter suitcase and want to instead bring a heavier one instead, or the other way around, why should I have to pay for both?
rish retweeted
This is my risk manager
The suspect in the shooting at the White House correspondents’ dinner is a 31-year-old from Torrance, California, two law enforcement officials said. nyti.ms/4vOoOy4
rish retweeted
This is the aspect of climate change that I worry most about — when instead of seeing gradual degradation, we cross an irreversible line.
This should be a bigger story.
Scientists are more concerned than ever that a critical Atlantic current will collapse soon and wreak havoc on North America and Europe. The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, or AMOC, is a massive conveyor belt of ocean currents that transports water from the tropics to the Atlantic.
Without it, severe weather would impact both regions at potentially devastating rates.
These scientists aren't just warning us about an environmental issue—they're sounding the alarm about a climate threat that could fundamentally rewrite how future generations survive on our planet.
theguardian.com/environment/…
Why can’t we ban these posters @mybmc
Bombay in 2026. Looks about 400 times worse than it did 30 years ago.
- more crowded
- more filthy
- illegal posters everywhere
- even less civic sense
- infinitely more corrupt
Great progress.
@MTPHereToHelp @MumbaiPolice @mybmc
Doing an excellent job.
rish retweeted
outstanding and on-the-money thread on what just happened in hungary. worth your moment.
This just played out exactly as predicted
So, a couple of the boys have been texting me: “Why the hell would Trump drop the Hormuz blockade bomb on a Sunday? It’ll send oil screaming past $120, maybe $130 if the algos really panic. Makes zero sense if you actually want cheaper barrels.”
But it makes perfect sense. Beautiful, even.
See, Tokyo and Hong Kong are already humming by the time the East Coast is still nursing its coffee. Those futures pits—Dow, S&P, the whole equity complex, plus Brent and WTI on the screens—never really sleep. You’ve got fourteen, fifteen hours of runway before the New York bell. Plenty of time for the right hands to lean in: long the indices in Hong Kong, short the crude in Tokyo, riding the fear wave as the blockade tweet lights up every terminal from Singapore to Sydney.
Then, right on cue, before the U.S. opens, comes the pivot. Something about “there’s regime change in Tehran,” “we can do business,” “Talks were Good,” the usual art-of-the-deal baloney. Markets whip around like they’ve been Tasered. Oil gives back the spike, stocks rip higher. The boys in Asia unwind clean, pocket the spread.
A few hundred million, maybe more, conjured out of thin air on the back of one perfectly timed Sunday morning post. Not bad for a morning’s work. The Street’s been running these kinds of games for decades: information, timing, leverage. Just never quite so… presidential!!
rish retweeted
Wharton’s latest AI study points to a hard truth: “AI writes, humans review” model is breaking down
Why "just review the AI output" doesn't work anymore, our brains literally give up.
We have started doing "Cognitive Surrender" to AI - Wharton’s latest AI study points to a hard truth: reviewing AI output is not a reliable safeguard when cognition itself starts to defer to the machine.when you stop verifying what the AI tells you, and you don't even realize you stopped. It's different from offloading, like using a calculator.
With offloading you know the tool did the work. With surrender, your brain recodes the AI's answer as YOUR judgment. You genuinely believe you thought it through yourself.
Says AI is becoming a 3rd thinking system, and people often trust it too easily.
You know Kahneman's System 1 (fast intuition) and System 2 (slow analysis)? They're saying AI is now System 3, an external cognitive system that operates outside your brain. And when you use it enough, something happens that they call Cognitive Surrender.
Cognitive surrender is trickier: AI gives an answer, you stop really questioning it, and your brain starts treating that output as your own conclusion. It does not feel outsourced. It feels self-generated.
The data makes it hard to brush off. Across 3 preregistered studies with 1,372 participants and 9,593 trials, people turned to AI on over 50% of questions.
In Study 1, when AI was correct, people followed it 92.7% of the time. When it was wrong, they still followed it 79.8% of the time.
Without AI, baseline accuracy was 45.8%. With correct AI, it jumped to 71.0%. With incorrect AI, it dropped to 31.5%, worse than having no AI. Access to AI also boosted confidence by 11.7 percentage points, even when the answers were wrong.
Human review is supposed to be the safety net. But this research suggests the safety net has a hole in it: people do not just miss bad AI output; they become more confident in it.
Time pressure did not eliminate the effect. Incentives and feedback reduced it but did not remove it. And the people most resistant tended to score higher on fluid intelligence and need for cognition. That makes this feel less like a laziness problem and more like a cognitive architecture problem.
rish retweeted
5 minutes before Trump’s announcement:
* $1.5B notional worth of S&P500 (ES) futures are bought in a single clip.
* $192M notional of oil futures (CL) sold.
More than 4x-6x any other trade size during the market close.
Insiders profited from his lies in broad daylight!
rish retweeted
this is actually insane
> be tech guy in australia
> adopt cancer riddled rescue dog, months to live
> not_going_to_give_you_up.mp4
> pay $3,000 to sequence her tumor DNA
> feed it to ChatGPT and AlphaFold
> zero background in biology
> identify mutated proteins, match them to drug targets
> design a custom mRNA cancer vaccine from scratch
> genomics professor is “gobsmacked” that some puppy lover did this on his own
> need ethics approval to administer it
> red tape takes longer than designing the vaccine
> 3 months, finally approved
> drive 10 hours to get rosie her first injection
> tumor halves
> coat gets glossy again
> dog is alive and happy
> professor: “if we can do this for a dog, why aren’t we rolling this out to humans?”
one man with a chatbot, and $3,000 just outperformed the entire pharmaceutical discovery pipeline.
we are going to cure so many diseases.
I dont think people realize how good things are going to get
rish retweeted
Jeff Currie from Goldman Sachs is probably the best person I know regarding commodities.
His take on oil prices:
I guess DOGE wasn’t allowed near the military. This is just crazy. newrepublic.com/post/207555/…
rish retweeted
The actual research is wild. Every time you push down a feeling, your brain has to choose between suppressing that emotion and recording what’s happening around you. It picks the suppression. The memory doesn’t get saved.
A 2000 Stanford study confirmed this: people told to hide their emotions while watching a film remembered far fewer details than people who just reacted naturally. Suppressing emotions uses up mental energy, and that leaves less brain power for saving new memories.
Brain scans show why. A 2012 study found that suppression quiets the hippocampus (your brain’s memory-recording center) right when it should be saving information. The two brain regions that normally team up to lock in memories stop talking to each other.
Over time it gets worse. Suppression keeps cortisol (the stress hormone) elevated, and cortisol shrinks the hippocampus. Chronically stressed people can lose 10 to 15% of its volume. Just three weeks of high cortisol can shrink the tiny connection points between brain cells by about 20%. The good news: studies show this shrinkage can partially reverse once stress levels drop. Not necessarily permanent.
A Finnish study of 1,137 older adults tracked over roughly a decade found that habitual emotion suppressors had nearly 5x the risk of developing dementia, even after controlling for genetics, smoking, obesity, and education.
There’s a better way to handle emotions that doesn’t cost you your memory. It’s called cognitive reappraisal: instead of bottling the feeling, you reframe what’s causing it. (“This meeting isn’t a threat, it’s practice.”) A 2003 Stanford/UC Berkeley study found reappraisers had more positive emotion, better relationships, and higher wellbeing. Suppressors got the opposite on every measure. And reappraisal carries zero memory cost.
The difference comes down to timing. Suppression kicks in after the emotion has already fired, so your brain is fighting its own response while simultaneously trying to record the moment. Reappraisal changes how you interpret the situation before the emotion fully activates. Same event, same person, but your hippocampus stays free to do its actual job: recording your life.
