Daniel Abyan retweeted
We’re hiring in Armenia. 🇦🇲
@nvidia is looking for a Developer Relations Manager for the CIS region—a technical builder who can help Armenia’s talent connect with opportunities across the region.
Apply and share:
jobs.nvidia.com/careers/job/…
The next game the whole world plays will let players vibe-code their own mods. It’ll be a wild world straight out of Mad Max, where people can create incredible structures, vehicles, behaviors...
28
I think Europe has only one way to enter the AI and technology race: designate a city as a special zone with zero bureaucracy and zero regulations for startups. Only all necessary laws protecting people's rights and a few other essential safeguards.
These special rules would apply only to startups operating in that city. They would be allowed to test robots, self-driving cars, and pretty much anything else.
Europe needs something like this to have a chance of entering the current technology race.
Frankly, I don't see any other solution.
33
Daniel Abyan retweeted
I completely disagree. We will need a huge number of mathematicians, and you'll see it within the next 10 years. Most of them will be needed in applied mathematics.
Solving mathematical problems will become routine. There's no changing that. But the field AI won't be able to replace is applied mathematics.
Any mathematician watching AI take over their profession can quickly change their approach:
- Find out what problems AI is solving right now.
Identify which sectors of the economy need these solutions today.
- Take that niche. Companies and organizations won't be able to apply all this knowledge on their own.
- They'll need professionals who can help them put it to work.
We are approaching a mathematical singularity. The number of discoveries in mathematics will become so enormous that our civilization simply won't be able to process them all.
We'll need armies of mathematicians who can (1) understand these solutions, (2) figure out where they can be applied, and (3) turn them into practical value for humanity.
This is the inevitable future of the new paradigm.
I asked @claudeai to create a video about humanity's acceleration 🚀
A 4-minute film on how humanity is accelerating: 10 datasets up to 2025, then 61 published forecasts through 2100. Made entirely in code by Claude Code — Python/NumPy for data and music, HTML/SVG for every frame, Playwright + FFmpeg for rendering. No stock footage or image generators.
🎥The process: Research into humanity's acceleration and future predictions → script → collecting and verifying historical data through 2025 → best-case scenarios through 2100 → researching forecasts from futurists (Kurzweil, Metaculus, etc.) → coding charts, illustrations, and music → rendering → revisions based on feedback → final video.
The result is impressive. Anyone with a Claude subscription can create videos like this right now. And btw, one of the best use cases for this tech is creating educational videos 🔥
Spotify has some of the strangest, most frustrating UI/UX I’ve ever seen. I still find it so hard to use.
41
Daniel Abyan retweeted
The statue of Prometheus is finally finished.
It was cast in Paris, crossed the Atlantic, and was assembled at Starbase. It took us 100 days to go from nothing to this.
People of the West, we have lived through an era devoid of dreams, devoid of destiny.
But the time has come to reclaim our dream of antiquity.
In a few months, we will start building a new city. It will be the most magnificent city in all of history.
After all, the great dream of the West has always been to rebuild Rome.
Come walk beside us in this endeavor. The world is waiting.
Daniel Abyan retweeted
All my enthusiasm comes from accepting reality as it is.
Look at what’s happening: AI is solving math problems we can’t solve, AI writes code, AI replaces people in routine repetitive tasks, AI does accounting, AI is taking over industry after industry. Look at how wamy.com has captured almost the entire market for home insurance litigation in the US. Or how higgsfield.ai/ is disrupting Hollywood.
Seven years ago, almost nobody would have believed AI could create masterpieces. These are real products. AI is creating real economic value.
Imagine you’re 15 years old in 1903 and you watch Ford build a car. On October 9, 1903, The New York Times published an article called “Flying Machines Which Do Not Fly,” arguing that humans might learn to fly in 1,000,000 years.
Then, at 81, you watch humans fly to the Moon.
In one lifetime, you went from horses on the roads to humans landing on the Moon. That is incredible.
My point is that you and I are going to witness tectonic changes over the next 20 years. It’s hard to see from where we are now, but this is where we’re going.
youtube.com/watch?v=o48X3_XQ…
Daniel Abyan retweeted
Your argument that we need to wait 24 hours is valid, but everything is changing now. You need to understand the new paradigm.
Maybe this will be hard for you to accept, but your text shows how unprepared you are for what’s coming. That’s exactly the problem. Let’s test your neuroplasticity and see if you’re capable of changing your mind a little.
We’re actively building virtual copies of cells. Thousands of studies are being done for this. The goal is to create a virtual cell that behaves like a real one. It’s an ambitious goal, and I’m confident we’ll achieve it. One of the strongest players here is biohub.org/, but many similar companies are emerging now. These virtual cells could eliminate 99% of real-world tests by running them virtually in seconds.
Many companies are now automating drug development. Maybe you don’t fully understand what this means, so here’s an example. You can build a biolab where every process is automated. Imagine a 20-story building where AI can run thousands of experiments simultaneously. If we need to understand some detail of cell division, AI can launch 1,000 experiments with different parameters and look at the results the next day. This data has an incredible compounding effect on knowledge, and that’s what many people are missing. Companies like this are being built right now. One of the strongest is isomorphiclabs.com/.
Anthropic has already built and is expanding its own biolab in San Francisco. And these are only the first steps.
You can bring up other arguments about why this will be difficult, but you need to get out of the old paradigm. This is not the era when creating a drug took seven years.
That old school will be buried in the coming years.
The world is changing. Change with it.
Daniel Abyan retweeted
It took us one year to automate the creation of complex applications. We built all the tools and the environment AI needs. Now AI can build incredibly complex apps with clean architecture. A year ago, everyone laughed at this, saying AI writes garbage code. Look at what’s happening now. Opus 5 was 99% written by Fable. This is insane.
The same thing will happen with biotech. The only thing we need is an environment where AI can propose a thesis, test it in virtual conditions, collect missing data in the lab, run experiments, and get results.
You’re right: building this environment will take time. Anthropic is already building such a lab in San Francisco. Everyone will do this — Moderna, AstraZeneca, and every new biotech startup.
Biotech will become one of the biggest areas of investment over the next 10 years. That’s where everything is heading.
I think we’ll start seeing the first serious results within a year.
Daniel Abyan retweeted
It’s funny how many people mock this as some not-very-serious discovery. Just remember that a year ago mathematicians were mocking LLMs too, calling them glorified T9.
Either way, biotech is where AI will have the biggest impact. It’s silly to mock humble beginnings.
Daniel Abyan retweeted
Tenkemo is now Live on Kickstarter! 🎉
It's been 3 years, and we've come a long way, but with your help, we can go even further! ❤️
kickstarter.com/projects/meh…
It took me a very long time to understand something: I should never allow any teaching, theory, or ideology to completely take over my thinking — especially when it comes to life itself.
Life is incredibly valuable, and we are unbelievably fortunate to have come into existence at all. Yet we often see people trying to diminish that value by making it relative to something else.
Relative to a country — “give your life for your country.”
Relative to faith — “give your life for your faith.”
Relative to an ideology, a principle, or some other idea.
I think this kind of thinking can gradually distort our perception of the value of life itself. If you have been convinced that your life, on its own, is worth less than some idea, perhaps it is worth asking whether you have allowed that idea to take too much control over your mind.
The only person who can determine the value of your life and decide what is worth risking it for is you.
If someone sacrifices their life for their own children, that is their choice. They have personally evaluated the value of their life through love, attachment, and their feelings for their children.
If someone refuses to kill a stranger and dies as a result, they die for their own moral principles. Again, this is their personal evaluation of their own life — through the lens of morality and conscience.
Yesterday, during a conversation, I heard someone say:
“We humans tend to overvalue life.”
But what does it mean to “overvalue” life? Overvalue it compared to what? What objective scale exists that allows us to say that a human life has been valued too highly?
After thinking about this for a long time, I came to the conclusion that I should not allow anyone to distort my thinking or reduce the value of human life in my eyes.
For a long time, I agreed with statements such as, “I should be ready to give my life for this or that principle.” And to some extent, I expected the same willingness from other people.
But now I understand how important it is to first ask myself a few questions: Who stands behind these principles? Who formulated them? Why do I believe they are true?
And if I sacrifice myself for them, will that really reflect my own convictions and the interests of the people I love — or will I simply be carrying out an idea that I once accepted as unquestionable?
Another important subject I had to reconsider is the idea of “sacrificing your life for your faith.”
I have thought about this a great deal over the past week. An enormous number of people throughout history have died for their faith. And this is not unique to any one religion. People from many different religions and worldviews have been willing to give their lives for what they believed.
Perhaps few things are capable of taking hold of the human mind as deeply as faith. That is precisely why it is so important to preserve our ability to examine and question our own beliefs.
I came to the following realization. If I am willing to give my life for my faith, that may indeed demonstrate how strong my faith is. But when we look at history, we see people from completely different religions who were also willing to die for their beliefs.
Their willingness to die also demonstrated an extraordinarily strong faith — in some sense, even stronger than mine, because they actually gave their lives for what they believed, while I have not.
And yet our beliefs may directly contradict one another. Therefore, the strength of a person's conviction cannot, by itself, be evidence that the conviction is true. A person can be absolutely certain about something — so certain that they are willing to die for it — and still be wrong.
And this is where the most important question arises for me: If the strength of faith is not evidence of its truth, how justified is it to put your own life on the line for something that cannot be independently tested and reliably verified?
I should not allow ideas to take possession of my mind simply because they are powerful, emotionally compelling, or deeply rooted. I need to protect the clarity, independence, and hygiene of my thinking — to keep my mind clean enough that ideas like these cannot enter unquestioned and take control.
411
Daniel Abyan retweeted
From late 2024 to mid-2026, AI companies fully mastered software architecture and programming. I think people have absolutely no idea how difficult that is. Have you ever really thought about it?
Building software is an incredibly complex process because it doesn’t belong to just one domain of knowledge. And after that, some people still doubted AI would solve mathematics. This will not be difficult for AI companies. All of mathematics will be eaten for breakfast.
Next on the list: finance, biotech, chemistry — especially materials science.
Once AI mastered programming, nothing else is really a barrier to mastering other domains. Better to accept this now so you can make the right decisions.