Natasha Loder

Natasha Loder

@natashaloder.bsky.social

Health Editor, The Economist. free words: overmatter.substack.com/subscribe

16K followers3.9K following1.8K posts

Pinned

Controversy sells. Careful science journalism is slower, less theatrical and harder work. Channel 4’s The Great ADHD Myth? aims its fire at the pharmaceutical industry but its shot lands on patients.My analysis. #adhd #neurodiversity overmatter.substack.com/p/anatomy-of...

overmatter.substack.comAnatomy of a TV disaster: why ADHD is not a social constructADHD UK has complained to Ofcom that Channel 4’s The Great ADHD Myth? is misleading and harmful

Natasha Loder reposted

There's more to the Character AI bankruptcy, and @regret.bsky.social has details: Court filings indicate the Ch11 was a key part of a deal that lets Disney hire most of CAI's staff, potentially acquire most of CAI's tech, and avoid the startup’s many legal liabilities www.wired.com/story/disney...

wired.comDisney Asked Character.AI to Go Bankrupt for a Get-Out-of-Lawsuits CardThe entertainment giant hopes to get trust and safety tech, among other IP, from a startup whose chatbots dozens of states allege encouraged minors to self-harm and kill their parents.

To be fair on Pangram, when I tried it out about a year ago it sucked really badly, but I'm told by colleagues who have tested it out that it is a lot better than it was.

This post is unavailable.

What world are we in when the death of someone’s mentally unwell child is fodder for a politician? It’s so so sad. I just can’t imagine being a parent and having to go through that.

Honestly LLMs right now feel like some intern has been given the corporate credit card and has gone mad. These firms are crazy if they think workplaces can support that kind of spending.

Jacob Aron@jjaron.bsky.social

Very nice explainer, both on the technical aspects of how AI models use tokens and the economics. Read this and you'll learn a lot about what is going on under the hood of an LLM ig.ft.com/ai-tokens/?s...

Anthropic, devoted roughly a third of its IPO prospectus to warnings of the “existential risks to humanity” of its technology, ahead of its listing" Its lawyers are apparently planning for the possibility that some shareholders survive to sue. #AI

Spies and scientists have long been intertwined in coronavirus research. That changes how we view the history of this area of science.

Gilles Demaneuf@gdemaneuf.bsky.social

1/4 None of this is particularly new, but most people still don't realise how crucial this is to the COVID origin question, and to understanding the institutional reactions to that question. @natashaloder.bsky.social released a nice little primer.

Natasha Loder reposted

Further data points that may help this investigation The mysterious "second peak" papers Part 1: Findings www.researchgate.net/publication/... Part 2: Analysis www.researchgate.net/publication/...

researchgate.netResearchGate | Find and share researchAccess 160+ million publication pages and connect with 25+ million researchers. Join for free and gain visibility by uploading your research.
Natasha Loder@natashaloder.bsky.social

None of this shows us where covid came from. But 20 years of intelligence agencies quietly cosying up to coronavirus research changes how you read everything history. New piece: the secret non-secret history of coronavirus research. 🧵 overmatter.substack.com/p/the-secret...

None of this shows us where covid came from. But 20 years of intelligence agencies quietly cosying up to coronavirus research changes how you read everything history. New piece: the secret non-secret history of coronavirus research. 🧵 overmatter.substack.com/p/the-secret...

overmatter.substack.comThe secret non-secret history of coronavirus researchThe wall between civilian science and biodefense intelligence was dismantled on purpose twenty years ago
View full thread

"Secret non-secret" isn't a contradiction. It is all public information--but laid out two decades of entanglement between virology and intelligence begs the unanswered question of where the lines between the two were drawn. Or whether they even existed.

None of this shows us where covid came from. But 20 years of intelligence agencies quietly cosying up to coronavirus research changes how you read everything history. New piece: the secret non-secret history of coronavirus research. 🧵 overmatter.substack.com/p/the-secret...

overmatter.substack.comThe secret non-secret history of coronavirus researchThe wall between civilian science and biodefense intelligence was dismantled on purpose twenty years ago
View full thread

The 2005 WMD Commission called biological weapons the intelligence community's "greatest" challenge, and recommended aligning spies more closely with scientists "inside government and out." Some of what it proposed literally couldn't be published, even unclassified.

Looking at the timeline of research that followed, risky science, military ties, and funding of foreign labs one has to wonder about the new collection strategies and "aggressive' and integrated targeting of work of interest to the IC.

None of this shows us where covid came from. But 20 years of intelligence agencies quietly cosying up to coronavirus research changes how you read everything history. New piece: the secret non-secret history of coronavirus research. 🧵 overmatter.substack.com/p/the-secret...

overmatter.substack.comThe secret non-secret history of coronavirus researchThe wall between civilian science and biodefense intelligence was dismantled on purpose twenty years ago

Rand Paul tweeted on X in August that the CIA funded NIAID for "forensic microbiology" R&D. That one line sent me down a rabbit hole: when exactly did coronaviruses become a bioterrorism concern—and what ties to intelligence never made it into the public record?

2003: the National Intelligence Council warns that a natural disease outbreak and a bioweapon release can look identical. 2003: CIA workshop concludes "traditional intelligence" can't handle future bioweapons threats and calls for a wholly new relationship between spies and scientists.

Natasha Loder reposted

For years I've been told that aviation emissions are negligible, so don't worry your little head about them. But I've kept pointing out that there are - and will be - no good technical solutions, and they'll keep growing. Now we know just how big the problem is. www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-heathrow...

carbonbrief.orgCCC: Heathrow expansion could push flights to ‘80% of UK emissions by 2050’ - Carbon BriefAviation is on track to be responsible for 80% of the UK’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2050, according to the Climate Change Committee (CCC).

👉

Natasha Loder@natashaloder.bsky.social

Where did Covid come from? The public scientific evidence points to the Huanan market. But China’s withholding of early-outbreak data, samples and records means the case is not closed. A short, non-technical guide to why reasonable people remain uncertain. overmatter.substack.com/p/in-brief-4...