Co-founder & the Dude @ FinalDose (YC P26) PhD @ Oxford Oncology Ending all cancers
San Francisco, CA
Joined February 2016
- Tweets413
- Following383
- Followers406
- Likes541
Jeff Liu retweeted
This is f*cking insane. Anthropic engineer:
"Prompting is basically over
95% of our engineers already run self-improving loops. The next move is graphs"
In only 10 minutes, she builds her whole Claude Code setup live, right from an empty terminal
Empty Terminal → Agents → Loops → Graphs → Self-Improving System
Prompting was the old method. Engineering the system around the model is the new one
Worth more than most $1,000 agent engineering courses
Bookmark and watch it today
Then read the full Graph Engineering guide below ↓
Jeff Liu retweeted
This is f*cking insane. Anthropic engineers just gave a 2-hour Stanford lecture on how AI agents really work
The clearest explanation I've seen, whether you've never touched AI or you build with it every day
Chats → Prompts → Agents → Loops → Systems That Improve Themselves
Getting good at AI isn't about writing a better prompt every time
It's about building a system that learns from every run and gets sharper on its own
95% of people will spend 2 hours on Netflix tonight, the 5% who spend it on this will build what everyone else ends up using
Worth more than any $2,000 AI engineering course
Bookmark it and watch tonight
Then read the guide below with ready-to-copy prompts to build a system that improves itself ↓
Jeff Liu retweeted
This is f*cking insane. Anthropic engineer:
"You're not supposed to prompt Opus 5.5.
You're supposed to build a system that prompts itself. At Anthropic, 90% of our engineers have already built these systems."
In just 30 minutes, she explains how Anthropic builds AI agents that remember context, learn from mistakes, fix their own errors, and improve with every run.
This is the shift from simply using AI to engineering systems that work autonomously.
Honestly, it's better than most $1,000–$2,000 agent courses I've seen.
Watch the video, then save it for later
Jeff Liu retweeted
It’s been a while! Like every other biotech nerd, I’ve been feeling quite context-bloated as of late, and writing is the only fix I know. So here's a long one on AI and clin dev - if you run trials for a living, I’d appreciate any criticism and feedback :)
Jeff Liu retweeted
Boston lab space is 28.9% empty. The Bay Area is at 30.7%. Houston is at 26.3%.
The XBI is up more than 20% this year. So why is no one moving back into these labs?
Honestly, it shouldn't surprise anyone. Back in 2021 and 2022, the whole game was cramming as many researchers and benches into a building as you could. A few things changed that pretty fast.
- AI-native biotechs lease about a third less space per person.
- Pharma is licensing molecules and sending manufacturing overseas. When we ran a talk at MBC Biolabs, we heard that close to 80% of the companies there outsource some or all of their manufacturing to Chinese firms.
- Later-stage companies want office, not lab. They're managing assets already in trials.
The lab of 2026 just looks different. Teams are smaller. The science is AI-native. And a lot of the actual work isn't happening in Boston or SF anymore. It's happening in Shanghai and Suzhou.
The R&D that does happen here is smaller, leaner, and set up to scale out somewhere else. Those teams don't need rows of benches. They need machines. If your building has 500 benches but not a single mass spec, liquid handler, or flow cytometer, nobody's going to want it. The equipment is the real bottleneck for early-stage work.
The few groups that still want big footprints are building them around robots and power. @LilaSciences grabbed about 244,000 sq ft at Alewife Park in Cambridge for autonomous labs. @medra_ai put hundreds of robots into a concrete industrial building in SF.
So here's the uncomfortable part. These buildings were built for a tenant that doesn't exist anymore. That tenant isn't coming back. Leaving the space empty and hoping 2021 returns isn't a plan.
You have to rebuild it for who actually needs space now.
- Deep tech and hard tech. I've been talking with groups here in SF, and a lot of robotics and hardware teams are looking for exactly this kind of space. Strong floors, real power, good ventilation. Retrofitting a lab is way faster than building new.
- Incubators built around machines, not benches. Rip out the bench rows and put in the instruments early-stage companies can't afford on their own.
MBC Biolabs is already doing this. Shared instruments, shared equipment, small teams that don't need 50,000 sq ft.
Landlords who follow that blueprint will fill their buildings. The ones waiting on 2021 are going to keep sitting empty.
Jeff Liu retweeted
The academics think the founder who raised at $2B valuation can pay but they can’t
You are a founder who owns 50% of your company and you have 20x voting rights. You owe 5% on $10B in the asset seizure tax. You owe $500M of your paper $1B. Find me a way to get a loan for half your illiquid net worth. You cant.
The asset seizure proponents are dishonest and also it’s not a 5% tax on startups. It’s a 50% tax in this simple case.
Jeff Liu retweeted
Base editing and prime editing clinical trial landscape, including today’s GSD type I clinical readout from @BeamTx.
Jeff Liu retweeted
I stepped out of "Musk," an operatically stupid four-hour hit piece, admiring @elonmusk more than ever before. It's an inadvertant love song to American innovation as told by the dumb losers who build nothing and complain about everything.
thefp.com/p/elon-musk-new-do…
Jeff Liu retweeted
Breaking
lifespan.com/blogs/magazine/…
Jeff Liu retweeted
only in sf: hosted an event last night, and now our waitress is interviewing at the neocloud whose founder was there.
Jeff Liu retweeted
The reason mRNA can't cure more diseases? Delivery.
We built NGX1 to deliver mRNA to any cell in the body using AI and multivalent physics.
Jeff Liu retweeted
1/ I'm a cardiologist. I've practiced for twenty-five years, through a lot of "breakthroughs" that turned out to be press releases. So understand the weight of what I'm about to say: I have never seen a single week in medicine like the one we just lived through.
In the span of a few days, four separate scientific breakthroughs landed. The stock market treated them as four unrelated stories and sent a handful of biotech companies soaring. But that's the shallow read. Look closer and they are not four stories at all. They are four faces of the same story — the biggest shift in medicine since the discovery of antibiotics.
Medicine is becoming programmable. Individualized. Written for one human being instead of the average of millions.
Let me walk you through exactly what happened, in plain language, and show you where this is actually headed. Because the future arrived quietly this week, and most people scrolled right past it.
Jeff Liu retweeted
Exactly right. The bottleneck has never been compute or capital. Its taste and judgment about what humans actually want. Infinite compute just makes the great founders faster and the confused ones more confused. teapaw.org/dflieb/status/20601962…
Jeff Liu retweeted
AI-guided redesign of laboratory-evolved reverse transcriptases enhances prime editing go.nature.com/49yUr5t
Jeff Liu retweeted
Chemputation will enable VibeCheming (writing code to make molecules) the same way LLMs have allowed VibeCoding. But first we must build the infrastructure for digital chemistry #chemputation
Jeff Liu retweeted
1. Sacks missed out on the greatest super cycle of our lifetimes at the height of his investment career to serve the American people.
2. Apparently, All In lost money on our AI summit — which means I lost money supporting Trump’s agenda!
I did benefit, as President Trump roasted me 😂😂😂 — which was priceless
3. Sacks divested 99% of his holding and did every correctly, so the NY Times put five reporters on it 🤦 and found… nothing!
4. Most folks seem to hate that the All In pod does so much politics — I know I do!
In fact, I think our absurdly high ratings would be even higher if we didn’t do politics. That’s just my opinion.
5. Having been friends with David for 30 years, I can tell you he’s the most by-the-book, type-A you’re ever gonna meet.
What a nothing burger… five reporters and three months to learn that sacks is an upstanding civil servant!
Let’s all say “thanks, Sacks!”
… because we have one the sharpest minds in the industry doing policy for America, instead of a captured ivory tower elite!
A look at how David Sacks' work on AI and crypto in Trump's WH benefits his investments, those of his Silicon Valley friends, and the All-In podcast he co-hosts (New York Times)
nytimes.com/2025/11/30/techn…
techmeme.com/251130/p6#a2511…
📫 Subscribe: techmeme.com/newsletter?from…
Jeff Liu retweeted
Deeply strange @nytimes article about @DavidSacks
Leading in AI is good for America. And there is no way for America to lead in AI without American investors in AI doing well. Irrespective of whether those investors are David’s friends or his enemies. And like everyone who has been in Silicon Valley for a long time, David has enemies in Silicon Valley who are also doing well by investing in AI.
The most disappointing part of the article is that there an interesting debate to be had about the wisdom of selling deprecated GPUs to China that are 18 months ahead of Chinese domestic alternatives and roughly 15 months behind our state of the art. As someone who is an active investor in national defense and super patriotic, I think this is a good idea but reasonable minds can disagree and zero attempt was made to engage with the relevant issues.
From a conflict of interest perspective, I think they are being appropriately managed and this has been to David’s economic detriment. His defamation attorneys letter to the NYTimes makes it clear that an exhaustive, good faith effort was made to divest from all potential conflicts. But it is quasi-impossible for David to fully divest from *every* company he and/or Craft has invested in that might *conceivably* benefit from good AI policy making. At the limit, theoretically every company in America and the American government itself (i.e. government bonds) benefit from good AI policy making.
I would guess that most of David’s assets are in private companies - if he were to leave the private sector entirely and put his assets into a blind trust he would still know what he owns as they are not liquid. Even if he were to do some dog and pony show of full divestment and a blind trust, does any reasonable person think he would not be able to walk back into Craft with his current economics intact?
And everyone who is even remotely qualified to shape AI policy has the same theoretical conflicts of interest.
I am 100% ok with talented citizens being able to have a dual role in the government and the private sector. That is actually the entire point of the SGE program. I think there is an argument to be made that it promotes and incentivizes ethical behavior. The downside of malfeasance for David is enormous and there is minimal upside relative to what he already has.
Separately, the @nytimes urgently needs to provide remedial math education for these journalists and their editors. The idea that 500,000 GPUs sold to the UAE could generate anywhere near $200 billion in revenue to Nvidia is ridiculous.
I look forward to the correction that will be assiduously posted to the @NYTimesPR account which has 90k followers vs. the main account with 52.8m followers.
I should note that while I do not know David well, we have many good friends in common and I like him personally. More importantly, I am grateful for his service, which has unquestionably cost him a vast amount of money. And my superstar sister-in-law is a partner at Craft, for which David is lucky.
