Scott shares his monthly collection of 56 interesting links and developments from July 2025, covering AI, politics, science, and culture, with brief commentary on each. Longer summary

This is a collection of 56 interesting links and news items from July 2025, covering topics from AI development to politics to scientific research. The post includes updates on OpenAI's status, developments in AI regulation, new medical treatments, cultural trends, and various scientific findings. Scott maintains his usual style of presenting these with brief commentary and occasional humor, while being careful to note that he hasn't independently verified all links. Some notable items include Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill", new AI safety developments, trends in social media usage, and various medical breakthroughs. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander presents a curated list of 37 diverse and interesting links, covering topics from historical events to recent scientific studies, with brief summaries and occasional commentary. Longer summary

This post is a collection of 37 links to various articles, studies, and interesting facts across a wide range of topics. Scott Alexander presents these links with brief summaries or comments, covering subjects from historical events and scientific studies to economic theories and technological advancements. The tone is informative and sometimes humorous, with Scott occasionally offering personal opinions or admitting to previous errors. The links span diverse areas including politics, psychology, economics, technology, and culture. Shorter summary

A wide-ranging links post covering recent research, political developments, and interesting findings across various fields, with particular focus on psychology research, political polling, and academic developments. Longer summary

An extensive roundup of links covering various topics in science, politics, and culture. Scott covers recent research on discrimination and peer effects, discusses political developments like Brexit polling and DNC chair elections, highlights interesting academic papers on personality and therapy, and shares various curiosities like tracking a child's first words. The post also covers developments in AI, drug regulation, and campus activism. The tone is analytical and exploratory, often questioning conventional wisdom and examining evidence from multiple angles. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues against harshly criticizing various groups often mocked by both left and right, emphasizing nuanced thinking and engagement with evidence. Longer summary

Scott Alexander argues against dismissing or mocking several groups often criticized by both left and right-wing commentators. He defends celebrities speaking out against Trump, people comparing politics to Harry Potter, Hamilton fans, Vox, Matt Yglesias, pundits who failed to predict Trump's victory, and those concerned about Russian election interference. The post uses a mix of logical arguments, personal anecdotes, and humor to make the case that these groups don't deserve harsh criticism, while also acknowledging some of their flaws. Scott emphasizes the importance of nuanced thinking, avoiding sweeping conclusions from limited data, and engaging with evidence rather than dismissing concerns outright. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander warns against forming strong heuristics based on limited data, using examples from AI research, elections, and campaign strategies to illustrate the pitfalls of this approach. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the dangers of forming strong heuristics based on limited data points. He presents three examples: AI research progress, election predictions, and campaign strategies. In each case, he shows how people formed confident heuristics after observing patterns in just one or two instances, only to be surprised when these heuristics failed. The post argues against treating life events as moral parables and instead advocates for viewing them as individual data points that may not necessarily generalize. Scott uses a mix of statistical reasoning, historical examples, and cultural references to illustrate his points. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander debunks the idea that Trump's supporters are disproportionately white, revealing that Bernie Sanders actually has much whiter support, and uses this to challenge common narratives about race and politics. Longer summary

Scott Alexander analyzes the media narrative that Donald Trump's supporters are disproportionately white, showing it to be unsupported by polling data. He then reveals that Bernie Sanders, not Trump, has a much higher ratio of white to non-white support within his party. Scott uses this to illustrate two points: 1) 'white' in political discussions often means the 'Red Tribe' rather than literal race, and 2) low minority representation in a group doesn't necessarily indicate racism. He suggests that Sanders' lack of minority support might be due to him being seen as a 'weird intellectual signaling-laden countercultural movement', similar to other groups with low minority representation like atheists or BDSM enthusiasts. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander presents a diverse collection of interesting links covering politics, science, history, and culture, with brief commentary on each item. Longer summary

A curated collection of interesting links spanning various topics, compiled by Scott Alexander. The post covers a wide range of subjects including political events, scientific studies, historical anecdotes, and cultural phenomena. Among the notable items are stories about medieval fighting myths, a massive Chinese ghost mall, Japanese parliament members' nationalism, and various statistical studies. The post maintains a light, often humorous tone while presenting these diverse pieces of information, occasionally adding brief commentary or connections between different items. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that effective altruism should be wary of pursuing systemic change, as it risks wasting resources and alienating supporters. Longer summary

Scott Alexander expresses concerns about effective altruism focusing on systemic change rather than traditional charity. He argues that pursuing systemic change risks wasting resources on politically divisive issues, potentially making catastrophic errors, and alienating potential supporters. The post is structured as a dialogue between two viewpoints, followed by additional arguments. Scott concludes that effective altruism's focus on direct, quantifiable interventions is valuable and shouldn't be lost in pursuit of more politically charged systemic change. Shorter summary