Metacelsus

>Gulf of Mexico

well, that depends on who's naming it these days...

So they did a perturb-seq experiment and then launched one agent per gene in the library?

Seems quite inefficient to me. Unless the goal is to spend millions in API credits.

It's called the gambler's fallacy for a reason!

Oooh those are really good! (I'd say more but I don't want to spoil anything)

This website definitely has "bad AI map" vibes, look at the USA for example

# WARNING

DO NOT, EVER, MAKE THIS DATASET PUBLIC

OR ALL THE WORLD'S EVIL WILL CHASE YOU AND YOUR FAMILY FOREVER, EVEN IN DEATH AND BEYOND

Welp, I guess OpenAI is cursed now...

I want to like Anthropic but this is just pushing my startup to use OpenAI

You're thinking of the Miller-Urey experiment. They got some biomolecules (amino acids, etc) but definitely not life

If you find six roaches, you've got more than six . . .

>Anthropic gates usage related to biology and related research. In their latest threat intelligence report they talk about how they detected and banned bad actors using the Claude line of models to do some scary stuff. Credit to them, this is a slippery slope and they seem to do a good job of detecting and banning misuse. But squint at what is happening though. The cure-all is gated for you and me, but Anthropic hires biologists, sets up wet labs and wants the discoveries for themselves. I alluded to this in my previous post.

As a biologist, this is the most annoying thing about Anthropic for me. If they really cared about improving health they would set up a trusted-access program so that biologists can use Mythos (et al) safely. Instead they're trying to monopolize biology.