Can't stop grooving to 'Baby It’s Both (Tick-Tack English Ver.) Feat. Ava Max' 💃🏻🕺🏾 with @applemusic #FridayFeeling# 🪩 💿 #ILLIT# #아일릿# #I_LL_LIKE_YOU# #Baby_Its_Both# #Tick_Tack#

Today I am announcing META-Bench, the first pure intelligence benchmark for AI. It leverages the hit auto-battler strategy game, TFT. I SWEAR I AM NOT TROLLING let me explain. The industry suffers from labs overfitting and giving us models that score high despite being fundamentally low IQ. Over the years there have been many attempts at benchmarking AI with competitive gaming. I am going to explain the failure points, and why META-Bench is truly the first of its kind. Chess. When picking a game to benchmark with, chess is the obvious first choice. It has clear rules, large player base, and a well defined elo system. The issue with static rule games though is that the best strategies can be figured out ahead of time and baked into the model during the training process. Too easily hacked. Memorizing more strategies is not a proof of intelligence. Dota2/ League. We’ve all heard of OpenAI Five. The issue with benchmarking on a MOBA is that reaction speed is a meaningless metric. We do not need our highly intelligent AI to be able to respond at the speed of top human pro players. And truth be told, we are years away from a LLM that is able to play MOBAs at the highest levels off of vision alone, even though the problem is seemingly solved years ago. What we need is a game that: - Has defined rules but cannot be results hacked during the training process - Large ecosystem of human players - Clear cut results and an elo system - Results that is not reaction time dependent There is only ONE game in the world that meet all the requirements needed for this benchmark. Teamfight Tactics. For those unfamiliar, TFT is a strategy based auto-battler created by Riot Games with ~100 million monthly active players worldwide. It is a highly competitive multiplayer turn based game. It’s as if Chess and League of Legends had a baby that’s born to be an AI benchmark: - There is a new set released every 3 months. - Time limitations in the 10-40 second range rather than the milliseconds required for MOBAs - Skill based enough for esports yet uncertain enough to require reasoning over hard scripts “Can’t labs just train models to be good at TFT?” Nope and the reason why it’s unhackable comes down to how the benchmark itself is set up. Due to the fact that the entire game is changed every 3 months and patched every 2 weeks, any data on a previous TFT set is effectively useless when it comes to raw pattern recognition. Strategy wise, there are core concepts that carries over from set to set. That’s why we have the same players hitting the highest elo every season even though each set is so different. Any efforts at overfitting here can be fully negated if the benchmark harness used for all models has every core strategy built in. You are never going to beat a carefully curated harness layer with strategy training at the model layer. By presenting the models in the harness with the same core strategic concepts, the only difference in outputs will be its ability to reason across the different scenarios of each game. The luck elements of TFT already ensures that no 2 games will be the same in the reasoning required. Run the models against each other enough times and you will have a clear winner. Aka, the world’s first true IQ test for AI. I really, really want to know which AI model would win this. So I am going to build this. Not too sure how I’m going to fund it yet so if you would like to invest HMU. I’m also looking to put together a small team of individuals who are both high elo in TFT and highly experienced with agentic AI. And if you are even remotely curious on the results, like and help share this post 🫡

I'm a cardiologist. Every day I tell patients some version of the same hard truth: the heart muscle you lost in your heart attack is gone. It won't grow back. We can open the artery, but the dead zone becomes scar — and scar doesn't beat. A 25-year-old scientist in Argentina is trying to prove me wrong. And her approach is clever enough that I'm rooting for her. Here's the problem she's attacking. When an artery blocks, heart muscle in that zone starts dying within hours. Unlike your skin or your liver, the adult human heart barely regenerates. So your body does the only thing it can — it patches the hole with fibrous scar. That scar doesn't contract. The heart pumps weaker, stretches, thins, and marches toward heart failure. This is why roughly half of heart failure patients die within five years. We manage the decline. We don't reverse it. Pilar Ferrer and her team at Amnova Biotech are going after the thing we've never solved: rebuilding the muscle itself. Their tool is inspired by one of the most quietly remarkable tissues in biology — the amniotic membrane. The sac that surrounds a baby in the womb. It's rich in regenerative and anti-inflammatory factors, and doctors already use it to heal stubborn wounds and repair the cornea. They've turned that biology into an injectable hydrogel. Cell-free — no stem cells, no animal components. It ships as a room-temperature powder, gets reconstituted, and is injected directly into the damaged heart zone, ideally during bypass surgery — the operation another Argentine, René Favaloro, gave the world. Once inside, it acts as a temporary scaffold that reengineers the healing environment: it calms the destructive inflammation, grows new blood vessels, and signals the heart's own cells to proliferate and repopulate the dead zone. Instead of surrendering to scar, the tissue gets a second chance to rebuild. The early data, in sheep — chosen because their hearts are close to ours in size and physiology — showed at 28 days: smaller infarcts, improved heart function, more new blood vessels, more dividing cardiac cells. Now the honest part, because I owe you both halves. This is early. It's preclinical. And the history of cardiology is a graveyard of therapies that looked beautiful in sheep and pigs and then failed in humans — different immune responses, different healing, different scale. Human trials aren't expected until around 2028. There is no peer-reviewed efficacy publication yet. This is a candidate to watch, not a treatment to expect. But I want to tell you why it still moves me. The whole strategy is elegant. It doesn't fight the body — it borrows the body's own oldest regenerative wisdom, the biology that builds an entire human being from scratch, and points it at a broken heart. It's cell-free, so it sidesteps the rejection and manufacturing nightmares that have stalled stem-cell approaches. It's stable at room temperature and delivered during an operation we already perform. Practical, not sci-fi. And it's the frontier I've been writing about for months, arriving from an unexpected place: the shift from managing damage to reversing it. Gene editing for cholesterol. Cell therapy for diabetes. Enzymes that erase arterial aging. And now, maybe, a gel that teaches the heart to remember how to heal. For my entire career, "the muscle is gone" has been a sentence with no appeal. A 25-year-old may be writing the appeal. Science with an Argentine accent — born in the same country that gave the world the bypass. Worth watching closely.

🔊 Johnson & Johnson says it'll pay around $5.5 billion to resolve tens of thousands of lawsuits over regarding its baby powder and ‌other talc products. The latest on today's episode of the Reuters World News podcast. Listen now