Totally agree. My father is 75 and started taking GLP1. He stopped drinking immediately, lost 25lbs already and I can't imagine hasn't already added some time to his life.
The calculus at 75 is much different than at 35 in terms of what "for life" means.
It seems like there could be an issue too that it just stops working that well 10 years down the road. Not an issue for my father at 85 the way it would be for someone at 45.
I have lost 30lbs this year and even the difference between .5 and .7 is noticeable to me.
There is also the variable that you can work out too much. I did a brutal 30 minute glycolytic conditioning session on Friday and it just doesn't matter how much protein I consume the next day. Something with ghrelin goes off the chart and the next day takes huge will power to not just eat everything.
I think it is even worse with max effort weight lifting.
I think a better framing is trying to understand biology before the microscope.
While the methods may look ridiculous to us today, the microscope doesn't just spring into being spontaneously. There needs to be a field of inquiry and ignorance that the tool evolves from in order to answer questions.
The reality that economics in 2026 is a type of folk science lacking its microscope or telescope doesn't mean the inquiry is useless.
"Economics is bullshit, the end" is not useful at all.
As a non-software engineer reading this forum it sounds like everyone is basically
von Neumann working on Operator algebras and Lattice theory.
I assumed that is why the view of LLMs is so negative on here. While Claude seems kind of amazing to me I am not a genius working on Lattice theory like most people here.
Of course not. I like to complain that AI is dangerous and should be regulated and then out of the other side of my mouth complain that it is unfair and a gimmick if the government tries to regulate anything.
Why? Because I am a social media addict that lives in 2026 and I don't know how to relate to things in the world that don't involve complaining.
Complaining you see is more form of epistemology and entertainment at the same time to me. Reasoned debate and nuance just doesn't get enough likes for me. I am all about the emotional response to a topic.
and the investigator vs the anonymous collective compressed version of whatever is in question.
Abortion comes to mind for myself. I would probably be considered rather conservative but to me any abortion law is absolutely insane. If I got a woman pregnant though I would want to have the child.
So am I for or against abortion?
To me, all modern "politics" is really just the emotional reaction to a slogan and bumper sticker version of a complex issue.
This is just an excuse for not learning and getting it done.
You do have a way to upload to your brain, it is just a slow bandwidth connection that takes time.
If you don't have time you have to make time by not reading the news, not reading social media, not watching stupid videos.
It is just the standard performative outrage over and over.
The same person will be uploading their ID a few days after it is introduced.
So many people have internalized an anonymous audience that they are performing to in terms of what they think the anonymous audience wants to hear that they can't tell what is their own actual thoughts and motivations.
That is why the motivation changes two weeks later and the ID gets uploaded.
It is really hard to believe you actually believe this unless there really is this class of people that are so addicted to social media that they have confused performativity with actual thinking.
I feel like it will have to become more finely tuned on topics of biology.
It is not just biology but is defaulting back to 4.8 for me on time series/information transfer techniques that happen to mostly have papers using the technique on neural data. Other information transfer techniques are perfectly fine, even cutting edge ones, but this one happens to be new and happens to only be discussed in terms of neural data so that is a no go.
With that said, I think it is absolutely awesome. The usage is really not bad at all compared to what I was expecting.
That isn't going to happen. To me what is going on is that no one really reads anything positive so there is all the incentives to write as hyperbolic + negative as possible to try to rise through the noise.
The reality is this all the standard lump of labor fallacy. I am not a software engineer but it is obvious to me at some point I will be using claude code or whatever to automate tasks. I won't be taking software engineering jobs, I will be using code to do what is done manually today that you wouldn't bother paying a software engineer to handle.
Today's software engineers will just be higher up the stack from me the same way they are today.
In 20 years, many of us will be working in sectors of the economy that don't exist today.
The idea we get something as powerful as AI and it doesn't create new businesses and sectors is just stupid.
Imagine telling someone in 1997 they are going to be getting deliveries from Amazon all the time in the mail. What kind of idiot would believe this? I don't even read that many books!
I don't even know I read this board and all the fucking dumb opinions.