Toggle light / dark theme

On Januray 25th, we will discuss different aspects of longtermism — a concept of effective altruism. To decide which ist the best action to take we usually consider the effects of our actions on the short-or medium-term future — whether we save someone’s life, or mitigate sexism or racism in the next generation. According to longtermism that is wildly mistaken. The value of our actions is determined almost exclusively by their effects on the future in the very long-run — the next millions and billions of years. Their effects on the next 100 or even 1000 years are just about irrelevant. Our everyday thinking is radically short-sighted, and common evaluations perhaps dramatically wrong. In this online meetup, we will look at a compelling justification for longtermism, at its historical roots, and some of its practical implications — e.g. concerning existential risks, or the idea that our time might be the most important in the history of humanity. Free discord session on 9:30 — 11:30 AM PST 11:30 — 13:30 AM DST.


What is the best action we can take? According to longtermism we should consider the effects on the future in the very long run — the next millions and billions of years — to answer this question.

Stuck at home with time on their hands, millions of amateurs around the world are gathering information on everything from birds to plants to Covid-19 at the request of institutional researchers. And while quarantine is mostly a nightmare for us, it’s been a great accelerant for science.


From backyard astronomy to birding, amateurs have been busy collecting data — and making real discoveries.

Review: Meat Planet (2019) by Benjamin Aldes Wurgaft

In the words of the book’s author, Benjamin Aldes Wurgaft, Meat Planet: Artificial Flesh and the Future of Food (2019) is “not an attempt at prediction but rather a study of cultured meat as a special case of speculation on the future of food, and as a lens through which to view the predictions we make about how technology changes the world.” While not serving as some crystal ball to tell us the future of food, Wurgaft’s book certainly does serve as a kind of lens.

Our very appetites are questioned quite a bit in the book. Wondering about the ever-changing history of food, the author asks, “Will it be an effort to reproduce the industrial meat forms we know, albeit on a novel, and more ethical and sustainable, foundation?” Questioning why hamburgers are automatically the default goal, he points out cultured meat advocates should carefully consider “the question of which human appetite for meat, in historical terms, they wish to satisfy.”

Wurgaft’s question of “which human appetite” – past, present, or future – is an excellent one. If we use his book as a lens to observe other emerging technologies, the question extends well beyond our choices of food. It could even have direct implications for such endeavours as radical life extension. Will we, if we extend our lifetimes, be satisfactory to future people? We already know the kind of clash that persists between different generations, and the blame we often place on previous generations for current social ills, without there also being a group of people who simply refuse to die. We should be wary of basing our future on the present – of attempting to preserve present tastes as somehow immutable and deserving immortality. This may be a problem such futurists as Ray Kurzweil, author of The Singularity is Near (2005) need to respond to.

The idea of slowing down the ageing process and living healthier, more productive lives is hugely appealing. It’s led to a growing trend for people looking to take control of their own biology, optimising their bodies and minds through ‘biohacking’. But how safe and ethical is this pursuit of longevity? And are there more natural ways of expanding your healthy lifespan? Video by Dan John Animation by Adam Proctor.

For mathematicians and computer scientists, 2020 was full of discipline-spanning discoveries and celebrations of creativity. We’d like to take a moment to recognize some of these achievements.

1. A landmark proof simply titled MIP = RE” establishes that quantum computers calculating with entangled qubits can theoretically verify the answers to an enormous set of problems. Along the way, the five computer scientists who authored the proof also answered two other major questions: Tsirelson’s problem in physics, about models of particle entanglement, and a problem in pure mathematics called the Connes embedding conjecture.

2. In February, graduate student Lisa Piccirillo dusted off some long-known but little-utilized mathematical tools to answer a decades-old question about knots. A particular knot named after the legendary mathematician John Conway had long evaded mathematical classification in terms of a higher-dimensional property known as sliceness. But by developing a version of the knot that yielded to traditional knot analysis, Piccirillo finally determined that the Conway knot is not slice.

3. For decades, mathematicians have used computer programs known as proof assistants to help them write proofs — but the humans have always guided the process, choosing the proof’s overall strategy and approach. That may soon change. Many mathematicians are excited about a proof assistant called Lean, an efficient and addictive proof assistant that could one day help tackle major problems. First, though, mathematicians must digitize thousands of years of mathematical knowledge, much of it unwritten, into a form Lean can process. Researchers have already encoded some of the most complicated mathematical ideas, proving in theory that the software can handle the hard stuff. Now it’s just a question of filling in the rest.

Research papers come out far too rapidly for anyone to read them all, especially in the field of machine learning, which now affects (and produces papers in) practically every industry and company. This column aims to collect the most relevant recent discoveries and papers — particularly in but not limited to artificial intelligence — and explain why they matter.

When science is politicized, or commercially compromised, lives are often lost. Let US put our political and ideological differences aside, and enjoy the science and information others have to share. Let US not try to control the narrative based on our political or ideological beliefs to push a flawed narrative people do not want questioned because it is flawed to begin with, and needs an added push. Respect what people have to share, and do not try to spread hatred against them. The comments sections can be easily used for you to share your point of view by questioning…O h yeah and “Question Everything”-Albert Einstein (known for his many conspiracies)