The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
So a lot of what we're seeing actually relies on technology that has evolved like artificial intelligence. A lot of the work that we did on decoding the brain just couldn't work even though we had a hardware you know like maybe 10 or 20 years ago um probably even earlier than that the decoding was not possible until this modern machine learning.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.