pdub110

[pdub110 @pdub110]

CyberDub110 got a color change wrap #cybertruck #telsa

[Andrew D. Huberman, Ph.D. @hubermanlab]

Emerging peptide nomenclature:
(“Peptides” = too broad)

Weight loss
GLPs & Reta; acts via multiple pathways

Regenerative
BPC157 is the biggie here.

Immune
Thymosin alpha, TB500

GH enhancing:
Tesamorelin, CJC, etc

Skin:
GHK-Cu

Libido:
Melanotan

[Andrew D. Huberman, Ph.D. @hubermanlab]

PEPTIDES MASTERCLASS. A must listen if you’re peptide curious, peptide skeptical, bullish on peptides, or anti. The science, the uses, sourcing, concerns, and much more. @AbudBakri thank you for such an informative discussion.

[Colin Wright @SwipeWright]

ANNOUNCEMENT: WE’RE SAVING SCIENCE!

We’re often told that science is “self-correcting.”

But that’s not really true.

Science doesn’t correct itself like a thermostat adjusting the temperature in your house. Science is a human institution run by human beings. And human beings are vulnerable to career incentives, groupthink, moral fads, political pressure, and fear.

And when those forces capture academic journals, peer review stops being a filter for bad ideas and starts becoming more of a credentialing system for fashionable nonsense.

This isn’t exactly new.

In 1996, the physicist Alan Sokal managed to publish a totally gibberish article in the journal Social Text full of trendy postmodern jargon. His point was simple: if you flatter the ideological commitments of certain academic editors, nonsense can pass as real scholarship.

Two decades later, @ConceptualJames, @HPluckrose , and @peterboghossian pulled off the “grievance studies” hoax, placing over a half dozen absurd papers in peer-reviewed journals. One paper used dog parks to analyze rape culture and queer performativity. Another rewrote parts of Mein Kampf in the language of feminist theory.

The problem wasn’t just that fake papers got published. It was that they were completely indistinguishable from the real thing.

And today, the problem is even worse.

We now have serious SCIENCE journals publishing papers about feminist lesbians marrying brine shrimp. We have disturbing papers that aim to “queer” and sexualize infants. We have scholarship on “lesbian-queer-trans-canine relationalities” and “trans-dog intimacies.”

But while Clown World papers are concerning because it makes a complete mockery of academia, the same broken, ideologically captured system is also publishing research in legitimate science and medical journals that pushes sex and gender pseudoscience, relies on deeply flawed data, and influences policies on the medical transition of children and young adults.

That’s not funny. That affects real people. It affects medicine. It affects law. It affects children.

And when critics try to respond, they often discover there’s no serious mechanism for correction. Submitted Letters to the Editor often go completely ignored. Contrary evidence is rejected without comment. As a result, the best critiques are often relegated to personal blog posts, social media threads, or newspaper op-eds, while the original paper remains in the literature wearing the armor of “peer review.”

That is untenable.

So Kevin McCaffree, editor-in-chief of Theory and Society (@Theory_Society), and I decided to do something about it.

Today, in the Wall Street Journal, we announced a first-of-its-kind article type called “Peer Review.”

The idea is simple: publication should be the beginning of academic scrutiny, not the end of it.

A Peer Review article can critique a paper from any scholarly journal. It can address problems with methods, evidence, logic, definitions, theory, or interpretation. But it has to focus on the claims and arguments, not personal attacks.

Submissions are capped at 2,500 words and go through a straightforward merit review instead of endless gatekeeping and ideological screening. We ask just one basic question: Is this critique coherent, serious, reasonable, or even popular enough to deserve scholarly attention?

If yes, it gets published.

And the authors of the original paper get a built-in right of reply, so readers can see the critique and the response in a legitimate academic venue.

That’s how science is supposed to work.

Science becomes self-correcting only when real people build the mechanisms that allow correction to happen.
That’s what we’ve done.

Now it’s time for academics to use it.

Read our announcement on the @WSJ below.
🔗https://t.co/gqkDE7aaDC

[Sue @suekhim]

AI is making kids dumber.

It should be making them geniuses.

Introducing Koji, the first AI tutor that gets kids to actually think. 👇

[Whole Mars Catalog @wholemars]

So it begins

$TSLA 🤝 $SPCX

[Dan @Daniel_Farinax]

Beginner video: How to install & use Grok Build (made for non-technical SuperGrok and X Premium+ users)

I got so many questions from friends, so I made this simple step-by-step guide.

You’ll see exactly how to:
• Install Grok Build in seconds with one command
• Create real websites
• Use Grok Imagine to auto-generate images & videos
• Run multiple projects at once in different folders
Grok even runs commands for you. No coding experience needed.

Watch the full walkthrough 👇

[Tesla Europe, Middle East & Africa @teslaeurope]

FSD Supervised avoids T-bone accident in the Netherlands

[Al Unser Jr TM @alunserjr]

I’ve never seen a full lap, side by side at Indy! Congratulations Felix!!! Huge Balls!!!
You definitely deserve, The Closest 500 Victory!!!🏁🏁

[Muskonomy @muskonomy]

NEWS: Famous Dutch YouTuber Enzo Knol was testing Tesla FSD Supervised for the first time in the Netherlands when a car ran a red light directly into his path.

FSD braked hard and avoided a T-bone collision.

Tesla Europe reposted the clip. The Netherlands has driven over 10 million kilometers on FSD Supervised since becoming the first European country to receive approval on April 10, 2026.

This happened during his very first FSD experience.

[SpaceX @SpaceX]

Live webcast of Starship's twelfth flight test starts now

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

T-zero is currently 5:30 Texas time

[SpaceX @SpaceX]

Counting down to our second launch attempt, the 90-minute test window opens at 5:30 p.m. CT with live coverage starting ~30 minutes before liftoff. Weather is currently 85% favorable for flight → https://t.co/2gZQUxS6mm

[pdub110 @pdub110]

When powerwalls are charged up to 100% can we get a notification in the app? Then I'll plug in may car and charge on solar the rest of the day when I work from home @teslaenergy @Tesla @elon

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

🇺🇸🇺🇸 This will be awesome!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸

[SpaceX @SpaceX]

Watch Starship's twelfth flight test https://t.co/wxna6dy4Lh

[Tesla @Tesla]

FSD Supervised v14.3.3 drives even smoother & nags you less

[SpaceX @SpaceX]

Now targeting launch as early as Thursday, May 21 → https://t.co/2gZQUxS6mm

[Tesla AI @Tesla_AI]

ASS now 33% faster

[Cybertruck @cybertruck]

Cybertruck is more than 10x cheaper per mile vs gas pickups in West Yellowstone

[Peter H. Diamandis, MD @PeterDiamandis]

Tesla reports one major collision every 5.3 million miles with FSD engaged. The US average: one every 660,000 miles. That's approximately 8x SAFER.