×
episode one: last year
leah: can i ask you 10 questions and then publish ur answers if any are amusing in a thingy that eventually you will receive and be able to stare at alongside other people's stuff?
aaron: sure
leah: yayay, what is your most-fond-of piece of your writing, and under what conditions did you write it?
aaron: uhh i wrote utopia lol while sitting on my bed with my girlfriend who was very inspirational for the main character
everything i've written has been in bed with my legs stuck straight out and under blankets with headphones on at like 1am
idk i think truth plus is underrated, cause it's a downer
i think for the children might be one of my most tightly written stories, and it inspired a bunch more set in that universe
leah: what is your aesthetic take on and history of use with drinkable meals like huel and soylent?
aaron: i mean, strongly pro. when i was a profoundly underperforming 24 year old, i was also basically an ascetic monk. i would feel kinda gleeful figuring out how to get my daily spend down to <$10, and that was...kind of like a guiding aesthetic principle which i also applied to time/attention? soylent seemed awesome, as a way to not be hungry and also not do any thinking whatsoever and also not worry about nutritional completeness
now i have greater appreciation for, yknow, conventional food, but at the time it was revolutionary and in-my-culture like nothing else was
leah: also where is truth plus? i don't see it anywhere:o
aaron: strangehorizons.com/fiction/truth
leah: what did your 10 yr old self like doing?
aaron: idk probably legos
drawing mazes
recruiting people to play in improvised games which had improvised yet very convolved rulesets
leah: what character from a book do you most want to be like?
aaron: old testament god
leah: lots of super-able-to-predict-the-future characters in your writing... have you made any efforts to get better at this?
aaron: there are?
uh a little i guess at miri we did some internal calibration training
there's also this thing called manifold markets
:P
leah: do you have a favorite wall/mural art from around the bay?
aaron: oh i mean, probably mine—i have two japanese wall scrolls that if you read them sequentially indicate something like "wild prosperous abundance gives way to a life of tranquil domesticity"
or you can read them left to right and then tranquil domesticity gives way to wild abundance, which i'm also okay with
leah: after this i wish only to know: if you were to establish a clothing line, what would its philosophy be? and then i will leave in peace with full appreciation for your having entertained u.u
aaron: "default clothes", which are fully accepted by society as totally unremarkable and the thing you wear when you want to opt out of all fashion and signaling
episode two: recently
leah: how's life been for you of late?
aaron: what? just how is my life? it's fine. i went to alaska spontaneously. i am seriously considering buying a castle in japan. i could renovate it. i just launched hyperstition which is cool. just finished up my drone propaganda visual.
we have a drone that you can attach guns to. and i think some people might not be tracking that these are really easy to make
i'll send you the video. many parts are not done. i'll send it to you as long as you don't publish it. in this newsletter.
actually when is the newsletter coming out?
leah: oct 31
aaron: that might work out actually.
leah: yeah i love drones.
aaron: that's great. now do you like drones with facial recognition, that can hunt you down through a crowd of people, that have guns attached to them. mario mangione
leah: mario what?
aaron: luigi mangione was the guy who shot that healthcare ceo. and this is a pun because mario and luigi are brothers. have you played the video game?
leah: no i was homeschooled *sounding annoyed*
what's the occasion for the new coat
aaron: im soft launching it here. see if people like it. idk i have to be fashion conscious. this is a joke. im dressed entirely by women. i don't know what clothes im wearing on a given day. i look down and see i have pants on but they were chosen. by my monogamous girlfriend.
cryoprotectants
kathrynbaney.com
leah: do you have any final words.
aaron: hey we probably have like 2 years to live. let's be nice to each other. yay everybody.
leah: thanks aaron.
aaron: thanks leah.
i find learning intrinsically satisfying, but being able to synthesize and apply knowledge to solve a unique problem is indescribably fulfilling for me. i am interested in researching how activity within neurons and circuits encodes internal brain states and influences behavior. my ongoing work in neuroscience and undergraduate research in psychology have inspired me to apply to stanford's phd program in neuroscience to pursue my research interests at the highest level.
my undergraduate research experience at uc berkeley includes psychology and entomology, giving me an interdisciplinary perspective that allowed me to pinpoint my specific research interests. in spring and fall of 2023, i worked at dr. keltner's berkeley social interaction lab. there, i conducted a quantitative analysis of psychoactive substances by coding the emotional profiles of psychedelic use. to increase inter-rater reliability, i designed an improved data collection method that better standardized responses. that same year, i designed and conducted independent research for my honors thesis to better understand how emotional states drive decision-making behavior. using psychometrics and behavioral tasks, i validated previous research findings that the emotion of awe had a positive effect on pro-environmental behavior and discovered that this effect was mediated through beliefs in monism. i presented these findings at the berkeley rausser college honors symposium.
these two research experiences in psychology deepened my understanding of affective states, experimental design, and statistical analysis. however, these experiences left me curious—what were the neurological mechanisms that were driving these changes in behavior? i realized that i could not answer these questions with psychological research alone, leading me to transition to neuroscience. since insects have been a lifelong curiosity of mine, i was elated to discover that fruit flies (drosophila melanogaster) were model organisms used to study the brain. previously, i had worked with drosophila in entomology labs under dr. peter oboyski and dr. kent daane from 2021 to 2024. though not directly related to neuroscience, my work in entomology reaffirmed my interest in hands-on biological lab work and provided me with transferable skills.
these experiences led me to full-time neuroscience research in the liu lab at ucsf, where i was particularly well-prepared to investigate motivated feeding behaviors using d. melanogaster as a model system. this work fueled my soul and confirmed my desire to pursue neuroscience. working under a postdoctoral researcher, i researched the neural circuit that encoded sugar-specific appetite and the metabolic impact of sugar feeding. in d. melanogaster, quantifying changes in response to a high-sugar diet presents difficulties, as flies may weigh less due to reduced feeding. troubleshooting this issue, i standardized a fat body dissection technique to observe changes in lipid droplet morphology independent of body weight fluctuations. furthermore, i developed a method to quantify morphological changes of lipids following dietary manipulation using imagej and rstudio. my adapted technique was adopted throughout the lab. using this method, i found that a 20% high-sugar diet caused a 46% increase in average lipid droplet size within a week.
i then investigated homeostatic mechanisms related to protein deprivation, which led to a co-authored manuscript that is currently under revision in science. this research presented novel evidence that phospholipids could serve as hidden nitrogen reservoirs to cope with protein deprivation. to validate these findings, i performed immunostaining experiments on the brain and fat body to identify glial-neuron interactions and quantify the impact of protein deprivation. i also contributed to the submission process by editing the manuscript and planning experiments to address feedback from reviewers.
building on this experience, i conducted independent research on how the amino acid glutamine influenced protein satiety behaviors. this project required developing a research plan, self-directed learning, and the ability to troubleshoot, all of which were aspects of research that i found incredibly exciting. using targeted genetic manipulation and brain immunostaining, i examined how neuron-astrocyte interactions modulate protein-specific appetite. i identified genes involved in protein-satiety signaling and confirmed these findings through behavioral assays and amino acid quantification analysis. currently, i am connecting these findings to how astrocytes respond to osmolarity changes using the patch clamp technique. this work was invigorating, reaffirming my goal to obtain a neuroscience phd. i loved the rigorous environment, and i found it deeply rewarding to systematically investigate questions about the brain.
beyond research, community outreach and education are important to me, and i took on several teaching and leadership positions at uc berkeley. i worked as a student assistant at the berkeley psychedelic science center (bcsp), where i produced educational content and managed communications. furthermore, i facilitated two undergraduate-led uc berkeley classes—psych 198: psychedelic science and philos 98: to boldly go, the philosophy of star trek"—which involved designing the courses, delivering lectures, and facilitating student discussions. these roles have made me confident in pursuing a career as a professor, as i look forward to both the research and teaching aspects of the field.
stanford is undoubtedly my number one choice of graduate school because of its world-class biosciences program. when i attended the bay area metabolism meeting and the neurobiology of drosophila cold spring harbor conference, i had the opportunity to speak with stanford graduate and postdoctoral students about the research they were conducting. this reaffirmed how strongly i wanted to pursue my graduate studies at this specific school and made me excited about contributing to this research myself. in particular, i am passionate about how neurons integrate information to produce behavioral responses, and i find stanford to be a great fit due to the many labs that research this topic. i am especially interested in dr. thomas clandinin's work on visual computation within neural circuits. i also find that my research interests align well with dr. miriam b. goodman's work on proprioception and dr. liqun luo's work on olfactory processing.
i am excited about the opportunity to pursue a phd in neuroscience or biology at stanford, a crucial step in my long-term goals. ultimately, i am interested in a lifelong career as a neuroscience professor at a research institution. my current work in neuroscience has been intellectually stimulating, challenging, and above all else, satisfying to my feverish curiosity surrounding the brain. these experiences have unequivocally reinforced my decision to apply to this program, where i am interested in further exploring how neurons encode internal states and shape behavior through both cellular and circuit mechanisms. i look forward to making novel contributions of my own to this wonderful field.
"if only it were all so simple! if only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. but the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. and who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"
a few years ago, the historian jack goldstone suggested this decade be called "the turbulent twenties." lately, when one of the most-discussed technology books has the premise that technology will destroy humanity, you can feel not just turbulence but something deeply anxious about our times.
we feel it. it takes so many forms that it's hard to explain. is it the economic or existential risks of ai? the increasingly violent global geopolitical situation? media bubbles leading to political polarization and a lack of shared facts? the decline in religiosity in the western world? is it that human connection has become harder, even as chatgpt is now our most private and accessible source of meaning and comfort?
in conversations, i hear deep concerns from all kinds of people, but especially younger millennials and gen zs. many young people are struggling to pay for healthcare or housing, disillusioned with institutions. they see how politicians claiming moral authority have not led to broad prosperity for everyone. even apparently successful, newly graduated college students seem to struggle as the economy is changing.
i'm only a few years older than they are, but i do feel a gap, a difference of perspective. there is not just a lack of hope but a lack of orientation—a sense that the world is so confused, systems so hopelessly misaligned—where we sense we need drastic change but can't agree on the direction.
some seem to think the best option is to disengage, give up on the system. others feel it's a moral imperative to fight for a larger cause: the next election, peace in the middle east, climate change, or ai alignment. another group works with the system while harboring deep pessimism that "late-stage capitalism" is inherently a failure.
but regardless of people's beliefs on issues, it feels to me there is something deeper missing in these conversations. i've come to believe much of what makes us feel politically, socially, and personally adrift is an inner crisis. it's not technology that is most frightening to us. it's a modern kind of moral uncertainty. i think it is a neglect of an idea that today may seem old-fashioned: virtue.
several decades ago, you might gain a sense of purpose and pride that you are living a life that aligns with the culture and religion of your parents. but as we know, the highly educated young of america, europe, and other western industrialized countries are increasingly less likely to see organized religion as a major shaping force in their lives. when i was young, my mother was a devout catholic. so was i, at eight years old. today, i'm not.
there is an old joke on twitter that if someone says "i like pancakes," the first response will be "so why do you hate waffles?"
we might be unsure of what we really believe but today, it's easier than ever to find people who will tell you you're wrong. especially online, we are quickly judged not just for factual errors but for apparent ethical shortcomings. rewarded by algorithmically shaped attention, people are quick to call out transgressions.
but are we able to agree on behavior that is right? do we even believe in an absolute right and wrong? the next time you are in such a discussion, i suggest you ask a critic—or yourself—what is the deeper ethical framework to use to decide? is it completely individual? culturally relative? what determines whether you are leading a good life? do they even believe in goodness or truth?
many of us were once told this in kindergarten: say and do what is true, helpful, and kind to yourself and to others. it may feel a little archaic, but the word i'd use for this is virtue.
as a child, if you're lucky, you learn from adults that you are responsible for what you say and do. you learn that while you can make mistakes, it's not right to lie, to be lazy, or to hurt people. it's even better for you if adults around you model this behavior. you gradually grow to respect these things not just because others tell you what to do, but because you see them demonstrated in small details every day. you wish to live up to their example. gradually, they come to take on an intrinsic value for you. in short, you come to see them as virtues like honesty, competence, kindness.
in an educated, postmodern, multicultural world, we have a certain discomfort with absolutes. prescribing one set of ethics to everyone is potentially oppressive to those who don't share our culture or values. that is a kind and reasonable concern. but i think that hesitation has led to a broad avoidance of recognizing any moral absolutes. we even avoid moralistic language, as language is the most obvious thing others may use to judge us. but this comes at a grave cost. you cannot genuinely wish to be kind while not believing in the value of kindness.
i'm not saying we should become more religious. and i'm not suggesting we need to pick one set of broad cultural values at the expense of others. but we are increasingly feeling the absence of a kind of moral framework—one that, for many, used to be supplied by religious belief. virtues are important because they help guide us on hard questions. ethics is bigger than ourselves. in uncertain times, it's more important than ever to discuss the parts we share in our vision of a good life.
without a shared orientation, we have even more uncertainty. with greater anxiety, we have no optimism. without optimism, we don't build for the future.
maturing means coming to terms with how human nature allows both horrific and beautiful behavior. it is recognizing that it is up to you whether you cultivate virtues or vices in yourself. what plays out for an individual is just the same for any group. for centuries, wise people have known that leaders are not best chosen just for their ability to make good decisions—the best leaders are models for the better parts of our nature. just as adults can model virtues for children, the best leaders model virtues. they encourage us to be better versions of ourselves.
we may disagree on many things, but i believe we can't ignore that some shared sense of right and wrong shapes not just our own lives but all of society.
virtue is not always popular. when a crowd has gone mad, virtue is wildly unpopular. deciding something is good or bad by popularity or by which group believes something is not just superficial—it's often wrong. online media changes many things. we readily know who agrees with whom, and this leads to forming opinions by picking a tribe. we have all learned how social media algorithms can flame arguments. how they destroy nuance. how online creators are rewarded for engagement, not truth. people from all parts of the political spectrum decide what to believe based not on what is true but on who else believes it. as people quietly adapt their beliefs to fit the expectations of the algorithms and their audience, they begin to restructure sincerity itself.
it can take daily work to remember it, but no matter what others say, truth, kindness, and honesty remain virtues, and you alone are responsible for what kind of person you are. even in the smallest interactions, you can model those virtues for yourself and for others.
i've noticed a few people hesitate when they hear this. isn't the retreat into individual virtue a form of luxury? you might be kind to your neighbors while doing nothing to address greater political or global concerns. what if you are proud in your virtue while the world (or the climate) burns? this is a good question. we must face this contradiction, too.
in paul schrader's film first reformed, a depressed young man feels suicidal despair about the future and the environmental destruction he sees. his pastor tries to give him hope: "wisdom is holding two contradictory truths in our minds simultaneously. hope and despair. a life without despair is a life without hope. holding these two ideas in our heads is life itself." the pastor himself struggles between hope and despair. but he is right.
virtue is not a choice between private goodness and public courage. such apparent paradoxes are two sides of the same larger truth. we each must find our own way to hold both sides together with integrity, imperfectly but as best we can.
life is not an optimization problem. creating a better future is not minimizing existential downside risk. to be the best versions of ourselves, we must remember to nurture honesty in our lives, care for the people close to us, and kindness in the systems and technologies we are building.