If you want to see what you will look like when you're older, stand in a spot and jump up and down repeatedly. Take photos (or pause a video recording) right at the moment after the lowest part of your jump. The upward acceleration will make your skin sag the way gravity will as your collagen weakens over decades.
But then again, by the time you're older you might look younger than you do now, e.g. "Ageing changes our genes – epigenetic atlas gives clearest picture yet (nature.com)" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45095532 (from the other day, no comments yet)
The AI companies won't run out of data to train on. Almost every user interaction is a significant source of data. Chains of interactions are even more significant, especially the longer and more sophisticated they are. Yesterday I was given A/B tests from both GPT5-Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Pro, something neither of then had done before. OpenAI also just acquired Statsig for $1.1 billion. Statsig does A/B testing and other analytics.
The data scrapped from the Internet and scanned books served its purpose: it bootstrapped something that we all love talking to and discussing ANYTHING with. That's the new source of data and intelligence.
I'm in more than a hundred Discord servers. I've been wanting to scrape the members of each of them to discover the people with whom I share the most servers but we're not yet friends. Someone with 10+ would highly likely be a new friend since we'd have a lot of shared niche interests
This is something I have been trying to make as a way to learn about graph theory. If I can find a way to make it work efficiently, I will definitely add this.
Yeah that would be awesome! You could build a whole new social network on top of Discord. Whether in this way or others, I believe we'll all be finding an increasing number of hypercompatible people as technology advances.
Imagine a top-level screen filter that processes all you see in ways which you define. For example, "hide all faces" can help you spot new details in a movie since your eyes won't be automatically attracted to faces. Or "hide all proper names" can make internet browsing more interesting and mysterious
Humanist, surprising, challenging but comforting at the same time
On the top floor, bright sunspots are cast onto the floor, peeking through the roof as if through the dense branches of an old forest
New kinds of thinking, new kinds of connections, new kinds of possibilities. The mission is to uncover more never-known-before territories every day. Permutations evolving through randomness, experimentation and pattern recognition. Start a thousand projects and add a hundred every day.
I dream of a public room filled with devices that let you see what is normally invisible: acoustic camera, thermal camera, microscope, telescope, endoscope, ultrasound, high-speed camera, hyperspectral camera, schlieren imaging (airflow), cloud chamber (particle traces)... It would cost millions but would expand minds HARD yo.
Note that this isn't exactly the same as getting more information.
Consider how terrible it would be if you were suddenly granted the ability to nitrogen gas: You would blindly stumble around in a dense fog before being eaten by a predator you never saw coming. Good filtering can almost be more important than good sensors.
I think that's also a great argument in favor of false-color/hyperspectral images of other planets: Why limit ourselves to the arbitrary wavelengths that were "chosen" just for Earth's atmosphere?
Human color-sense is arbitrary in that it exists for light from a particular star filtering through a particular chemical medium and illuminating stuff that is of particular interest to us and which is detectable by our particular biological tools.
Heck, even our cosmically-close sibling-species have different perceptions, like flowers and insects that use ultraviolet signals and detection. Or animals that can easily detect light polarization.
That's a pretty popular kind of star. I believe stars have surface temperature from 3K to 10K, corresponding to a pretty narrow range of black body radiation. Then it's mostly unaffected by that chemical medium, save for some scattering.
Yes, we could see some IR and UF, but that wouldn't expand that spectrum dramatically. Visible light occupies a tiny part of total EM spectrum, so expanding it arithmetically still leaves you with a tiny subset.
Humans are actually quite good at seeing light polarization. I can easily do that with my laptop screen. I've found no use for it, though.
All combined, it would allow for the perception of a different kind of reality for the person immersed in the multiple input streams. It would expand minds hard indeed yo.
But then again, by the time you're older you might look younger than you do now, e.g. "Ageing changes our genes – epigenetic atlas gives clearest picture yet (nature.com)" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45095532 (from the other day, no comments yet)