Oppression always has two sides to it. The one who does it. And the one who silently watches it. Don't be on either side. Society, Philosophy, tech in pinned!
Joined December 2019
- Tweets5.2K
- Following215
- Followers452
- Likes8.8K
letsbuildmore retweeted
New blog post from our group! Do you create dashboards / HTML pages with lots of AI-generate texts, and get frustrated (like us) about how they're hard to read? Check out our tips here (and, send them to your coding agents)!!
letsbuildmore retweeted
I strongly dislike this line of thought, and it's in bad taste. Just the posturing, not the forecasting itself, which may be logically reasonable. IMO just too much "xyz sad + bad inevitable thing will happen and we have no control over it, well here's how you can get rich from it tho lol". This applies to a lot of posts high on their own thonkism.
- A huge share of talk (not just this post) prophesies in absolute terms and assumes we have no agency over how things play out.
- "the line must go up", "it is unavoidable", etc. No, it is not.
- The tone itself is unnecessarily triumphant: "Rejoice," "there is deliverance for those who dare." Brother in thonkism, deliverance for whom? Why the hell would you say "the benefits of abundant intelligence will accrue FAR outside SF"?
- They describe the K-shape, the inequality, the displacement. Okay FINE. Do they show any remorse, any contempt for that future? Barely. A few flickers only.
- ending is also hellishly contemptible. hey does this sound too terrible? they say, well remember that our ancestors would call our present apocalyptic too. Is that it? Is that what you will have to say to Ravi?
- they may say “Oh hey, we’re just analysts, we don’t want to take a moral position on all of this.” Then why write so indulgently and relishingly? “Rejoice,” “deliverance for those who dare,” and so on.
It's grim, smug, almost indulgent awe at a dystopia. You may think that all of it is logically inevitable, but PLEASE, FOR GOD'S SAKE, don't adopt a language of helplessness and pretend we have no agency, or one that normalises/glorifies these dystopian forecasts.
The benefits of abundant intelligence will accrue far outside of San Fransisco.
Spent the last year writing about capital, sovereignty, and the coming reordering of economic power.
THE COMMANDING HEIGHTS
Commanding-Heights.com
letsbuildmore retweeted
Hard for me to see someone who was a colleague at MIT relishing in my destruction. Particularly since they barely knew me and never bothered--as perhaps scientists should--to check if there was another version of events.
🚨 BOMBSHELL COURT EVIDENCE EXPOSES EXPLOSIVE PRIVATE MESSAGES REVEALING COORDINATION BETWEEN KRISTIN KNOUSE AND MIT PROFESSOR SANGEETA BHATIA IN THE DAVID M. SABATINI ORDEAL.
🔱 NEW REVELATION — Court evidence exposes how Knouse and Bhatia privately celebrated Sabatini’s removal, discussed the potential destruction of his professional career, and anticipated the revocation of his @MIT tenure.
An 80-message exchange between Kristin Knouse and MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia, dated August 20–21, 2021, reveals their private reactions immediately following Whitehead Institute and HHMI's severance of ties with Professor @DMSabatini.
The communications contain statements that deserve serious public examination.
🔴 1. “YOU DID IT” — “AND HE’S OUT.”
On August 20, 2021, Bhatia congratulated Knouse:
🔴 “YOU DID IT. You crossed the finish line. It's out in the open. And you're not out in the open. And you're on the faculty. And he's out.”
Knouse responded:
🔴 “You connecting me to Nancy [Hopkins]was the turning point. I will never forget that walk in Lexington.”
🔴 2. “THIS WAS THE OUTCOME I DREAMED OF.”
The following morning, as news coverage spread, Knouse discussed the possibility of Sabatini losing his MIT tenure:
🔴 “Hard to imagine MIT will be left with any choice other than to revoke tenure.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “You're right about tenure”
She subsequently wrote:
🔴 “This was the outcome I dreamed of but NEVER certain I would get it.”
Knouse also described her assessment of Whitehead's handling of the matter:
🔴 “And as skeptical as I was of Whitehead's end game, in the end I think the overall process was perfectly executed.”
Bhatia expressed her approval of Whitehead Institute Director Ruth Lehmann:
🔴 “I'm proud of Ruth [Lehmann]”
These exchanges occurred months before MIT's April 2022 tenure-revocation recommendation.
🔴 3. THE PROFESSIONAL CONSEQUENCES — BEYOND WHITEHEAD.
The participants also discussed Sabatini's corporate affiliations and prospects for future employment.
Knouse wrote:
🔴 “I know of one company already speaking with lawyers to remove him on grounds of morality clause.”
She subsequently stated:
🔴 “Hard to imagine how he can be gainfully employed anywhere after the past 24 hours ...”
These were not merely discussions about an institutional investigation. They extended to the potential consequences for Sabatini's career, tenure, corporate affiliations, and future livelihood.
🔴 4. THE DIVERSITY SURVEY AND PROTECTION FROM PUBLIC IDENTIFICATION.
In another particularly consequential exchange, Bhatia wrote:
🔴 “Also the dei survey and subsequent investigation really protects you, which I love. There is not even a scent of whistleblower in all the press.”
This statement takes on particular significance alongside the previously disclosed communications in which Knouse and Nora Kory discussed using Whitehead's diversity survey to conceal an investigation already under consideration (📑 see the original court evidence in the first comment below).
🔴 5. “WE DRANK CHAMPAGNE” — CELEBRATING AS THE NEWS SPREAD.
Perhaps the most striking exchange appears on KK011419.
On August 21, 2021, Knouse declared:
🔴 “I KNOW! Young people took down a relatively young king. Progress, progress, progress.”
Knouse also wrote:
🔴 “Two other women who came forward and I drank champagne while watching the Tweets and articles roll in last night. It felt like campaign headquarters after an election victory. Really special.”
Bhatia responded:
🔴 “That's awesome.”
These exchanges reinforce the serious concerns about coordination and conflicts of interest raised by our previous disclosures. Their significance must be assessed alongside the full documentary record and the subsequent jury verdict.
The scientific community deserves full accountability for any misconduct established by the evidence, including the roles of individuals who participated in or improperly influenced the institutional processes that subjected Professor Sabatini to a devastating ordeal and profoundly damaged his career.
📑 REVIEW THE ORIGINAL COURT EVIDENCE BELOW.
🔱 ScienceGuardians™ Legal and Investigative Team
MORE COURT EVIDENCE. MORE REVELATIONS. STAY TUNED. ⚠️
@SciGuardians 🔱
letsbuildmore retweeted
This is so tragic and heartbreaking. Please never change your medications’ dosage based on LLM advice.
schenklawfirm.com/wp-content…
letsbuildmore retweeted
Introducing the Parallel Decisions API: the first web-grounded decisions engine.
Decision models like Jev can answer in an instant, but they lack the recency of current news. Now you can get both in a single call.
Decisions API is live today at $0.001 per request.
Try it with 5,000 free requests: platform.parallel.ai/play/de…
Here are some examples we've been experimenting with:
- Fact-check content (@Grok is this true?)
- Refresh stale banking records
- Classify companies and leads with fresh signals
- Backtest trading strategies
- Track competitor e-commerce inventory
letsbuildmore retweeted
> be a high-flying MIT scientist
> discover mTOR
> expected to win a Nobel Prize some day
> have consensual relationship with younger female biology MIT professor
> she accuses him of sexual harassment, coercion and grooming after he declines a long term relationship with her
> MIT launches investigation
> MIT lets the accuser’s allies help pick the judges and threaten the president if he wasn’t destroyed
> lo and behold, investigation finds he violated MIT’s sexual relationship and anti-harassment policies
> he gets fired and resigns under threat of termination
> loses his lab
> he sues her for defamation
> jury awards him $6 million in defamation case and rejects her claims that she was coerced in any way
How did 13 members of a civilian jury come to a different conclusion than @MIT?
Answer: MIT’s investigation was not exactly independent thanks to coordinated female faculty collusion. It was a kangaroo court and the verdict was pre-determined
🚨 BOMBSHELL COURT EVIDENCE EXPOSES INSIDER INFLUENCE OVER MIT'S TENURE-REVIEW PROCESS IN THE DAVID M. SABATINI ORDEAL.
🔱 NEW REVELATION — Court evidence exposes MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia's involvement in the selection of Sabatini's tenure-review committee
On 27 September 2021, Kristin Knouse exchanged messages with Izabella Pena following a conversation with @MIT Professor Sangeeta Bhatia.
The court-disclosed messages reveal Kristin Knouse telling Izabella Pena:
🔴 “Sangeeta just called”
🔴 “they even asked for insight into who to put on the committee”
🔴 “AND she said she will go to Rafael Reif’s office and protest the decision if and when needed.”
Pena responded:
“At least they are asking her insight”
Knouse replied:
“Exactly”
“This is good”
⚠️ The evidence exposes a troubling channel of insider influence surrounding MIT's tenure-review process.
These contemporaneous communications document that Knouse understood Bhatia to have been consulted about the committee's composition and to be prepared to challenge its eventual decision directly with MIT President Rafael Reif.
Rather than an independent review insulated from interested parties, the messages reveal access to the committee-selection process by an academic aligned with the complainant, raising serious concerns about institutional impartiality and conflicts of interest.
This disclosure adds another significant piece to the growing documentary record surrounding the institutional handling of Professor @DMSabatini's case.
📑 REVIEW THW ORIGINAL COURT EVIDENCE BELOW.
🔱 ScienceGuardians™ Legal and Investigative Team
MORE COURT EVIDENCE. MORE REVELATIONS. STAY TUNED. ⚠️
@SciGuardians 🔱
letsbuildmore retweeted
Alex Pretti's father: Our son was shot and killed by the government, federal immigration agents, on January 24th, 2026. We learned about his death from the media as we saw him being shot repeatedly in the back after helping a woman from his community. This was not a protest that Alex was at. His hands were in the air, and his face was on the ground when he was executed by ICE agents. We know exactly what our eyes saw. No one from the federal government called us on that day. But they did go on TV to tell lies about Alex. No one has called us since. No one has recanted those lies.
letsbuildmore retweeted
These are all of the orgs being impacted by the cuts. Screenshot provided by the same Sr. Director.
letsbuildmore retweeted
BREAKING: Brazil’s President Lula da Silva wins reelection, defeating Trump ally Flávio Bolsonaro
letsbuildmore retweeted
This probably hits hard if you failed history in high school.
Hitler was a far-Right fascist whose party was named the National Socialist German Workers' Party to attract working-class voters.
Then he banned the Social Democratic and Communist parties, and sent socialists and communists to concentration camps.
letsbuildmore retweeted
I swear SOMETHING broke in society since 2020 and nobody wants to talk about it.
And I’m not talking about masks, lockdowns, or COVID. I mean the FEELING of life.
Everything reopened. We went back to work. Restaurants filled up. Events came back. But somehow life still feels… different.
Years disappear faster. People feel more disconnected. Everything feels more expensive, stressful & rushed.
And somehow we’re all constantly exhausted. I can’t even explain exactly what we lost. I just know life before 2020 felt more ALIVE.
Tell me I’m not the only one who feels this.
