Pinned Tweet
BIG NEWS!
For the past few years, we've given scientists budgets so they can fund their peers with small, fast grants. Today, we're going bigger.
We're opening up a call to find and fund emerging "field builders"—people with the ambition and curiosity to kickstart a new field of science and technology. You'll get a budget of $70,000 to regrant (up to $10,000) out to projects and ideas and join a community of explorers.
Do you have an idea for a new field of science that *should* exist? Please apply!
Field Builders make the fields that make the future. More people should consider the role.
We’re backing at least 50 Field Builders to launch grant programs in emerging scientific fields. Each Field Builder will award $70,000 to researchers they recruit and receive a $5,000 honorarium for leading the work.
Applications for the Field Building Accelerator are open now through December 15, 2026: fieldbuilding.org/
David Lang retweeted
Help build the field of building fields. A great project.
BIG NEWS!
For the past few years, we've given scientists budgets so they can fund their peers with small, fast grants. Today, we're going bigger.
We're opening up a call to find and fund emerging "field builders"—people with the ambition and curiosity to kickstart a new field of science and technology. You'll get a budget of $70,000 to regrant (up to $10,000) out to projects and ideas and join a community of explorers.
Do you have an idea for a new field of science that *should* exist? Please apply!
I wrote up my best ideas on *who* makes a good field builder, *how* they do it, and why more people should consider the job.
The Art of Field Building
fieldbuilding.org/the-art-of…
Ignore the disclaimer, this interview is well worth the time.
I learned a lot from Niko’s discussion with Jacob Glanville, and I think everyone would benefit from few hours of “hardcore immunology”.
My podcasts are way too long and way too technical. Few people have time to sit through 90 minutes of hardcore immunology!
But if there's just one idea to take away from my interview with Jake Glanville at Centivax, a company developing universal flu vaccines and antivenoms, then I think it's this:
First, influenza (and many other viruses or pathogens) mutate so rapidly that we keep getting infected by slightly different versions of them. And so the challenge of making a universal flu vaccine is to elicit antibodies that recognize many different strains, including ones that don't yet exist.
The normal approach to this problem is just to mix together antigens from many different strains and inject them into humans all together. But your immune system then generates separate antibodies against each antigen, without necessarily producing antibodies that recognize ALL of them.
(Imagine a vaccine with 20 different versions of influenza's hemagglutinin protein. Your immune system might make antibodies against version A, others against B, and others against C. But what happens when influenza mutates again, producing version 21? Your body has no antibodies.)
What we really want are antibodies that recognize regions of the virus that rarely change! These so-called "conserved epitopes" are more likely to be shared across past, present, and future strains of ther pathogen.
So Jake, noticing this problem, invented a thing called conservation–concentration coupling. The gist is that, instead of injecting ALL of the antigens into a human at high doses, you deliberately lower the concentration of each one. There's only a tiny bit of each antigen in the vaccine, in other words; too little to elicit an immune response on its own. (If a B cell comes along and recognizes only antigen A, that B-cell won't become strongly activated!)
If, however, a B cell comes along that recognizes some converved region across MANY of the antigens, and it can bind to all of them, then it WILL become activated. Even though each individual antigen is present at a very low concentration, the B cell effectively encounters 20 times as much antigen, or 20x the normal dose. It is stimulated enough to proliferate, while the B cells recognizing only individual strains get "outcompeted."
In other words, you're using antigen concentration to bias the immune system toward making broadly reactive antibodies. This is the key idea behind Centivax, and they've gotten really compelling data that this actually works in mice and humans (~180 patients in their phase I, which is now finished.)
David Lang retweeted
I'm starting by creating a program myself. It's called Living Threshold. The open call for microgrants is live now! experiment.com/programs/livi….
David Lang retweeted
This is an incredible flower. It is engineered.
To make it, you take a gene encoding a red pigment and insert a transposon into the middle of it. This transposon keeps the gene switched 'off.'
As the flower develops, the transposon spontaneously "jumps" out of the gene in some cells, thus restoring the gene and enabling it to make the color red.
Every red speck, then, is a cell where that jump happened, and all the white is cells where it didn't. This is, in short, randomness in biology made manifest.
You can tinker with these transposons so that they jump more often or less often. You could also insert multiple pigment genes with transposons that jump at different rates to get entirely different patterns of colors.
Application deadline next week—July 10th!
Announcing the Hyperspectral Biology Fund:
It's possible to see engineered microbes from space; not with the naked eye, but by the distinctive way their molecules absorb light.
The secret is hyperspectral cameras. Whereas a normal camera captures just three colors (red, green, and blue), a hyperspectral camera captures the full spectrum of light at every pixel. When merged with synthetic biology, one can create engineered organisms that sense something (a pathogen, explosive, pollutant, etc) and then monitor them using satellites with hyperspectral cameras orbiting Earth. The end goal is to build a planetary-scale biosensing network.
I'm giving away $75,000 in microgrants to help grow this field. Applications are due by July 10.
Thanks to @davidtlang and the Experiment Foundation for making this possible.
Looking for new ideas at the intersection of synthetic biology and planetary monitoring…
Announcing the Hyperspectral Biology Fund:
It's possible to see engineered microbes from space; not with the naked eye, but by the distinctive way their molecules absorb light.
The secret is hyperspectral cameras. Whereas a normal camera captures just three colors (red, green, and blue), a hyperspectral camera captures the full spectrum of light at every pixel. When merged with synthetic biology, one can create engineered organisms that sense something (a pathogen, explosive, pollutant, etc) and then monitor them using satellites with hyperspectral cameras orbiting Earth. The end goal is to build a planetary-scale biosensing network.
I'm giving away $75,000 in microgrants to help grow this field. Applications are due by July 10.
Thanks to @davidtlang and the Experiment Foundation for making this possible.
"The garages of Silicon Valley are no myth. And no accident." -@stewartbrand
I maintain that historians will look back and determine the American dream was never about homeownership—it was about *garage* ownership.
It could actually be a significant problem that Europe doesn't have enough garages. This sounds like a joke, but I'm serious. Garages let you work on stuff that doesn't matter yet, which is how big things often start. The outliers of ideas need the outliers of space.
1
5
418
David Lang retweeted
Very grateful to the Experiment Foundation and @navigationfund the "Beyond the Journal award" recognizing our contributions to open science. 1/
David Lang retweeted
If you’re looking for inspiration and worry it’s truly impossible to operate differently in science, take a look at some of these folks who are quietly redefining what is possible without permission or guarantees. Huge kudos to the recipients and thanks to @davidtlang for showcasing them!
experiment.foundation/beyond
David Lang retweeted
New at Good Science Project, from @aishdoingthings and me: Venture Capital Has Lessons for Government and Philanthropy. bit.ly/468MIcx
Dempsey hit a chord—a topic that’s been lighting up my private conversations lately: *Post-Founder Archetypes*
The moment feels similar to 2008, when finance careers went from highly coveted to passé. The social hierarchy seems to run on these ~20-year cycles.
The question now: what comes next?
I'll go a step further than Dempsey. I'm predicting the rise of the *bricoleur*, in the Lévi-Strauss sense of the term: someone who can make and *remake* things with the tools at hand. There's never been a better time to be a maker of things and stories, including your own personal myths.
If you're unbound by the dogma of product/market fit, the world opens widely, ready to be remade by a small group of friends.
I've also noticed the most interesting people I know are having a *terrible* time answering the "what do you do?" question. They can tell you about a project they're working on, but they'll shirk any qualifying identity description, including and especially "founder".
My favorite analogy comes from biology: monopodial vs sympodial growth in trees. Monopodials (like redwoods) have one big trunk and aim for continuous vertical growth. Sympodials (like oaks) grow via multiple branches. The metabolic strategies are very different. Monopodials put all their energy into growing tall quickly, whereas the sympodial plants hedge with multiple different leading edges, which is more resilient.
The next high-status career will be sympodial. Or what @zebriez called Flounder Mode—moving from project to project with people you like, and not letting your identity get too tangled up with any one of them.
(New Essay) VC-Backed Startups are Low Status
The traditional VC-backed startup path is becoming low status in the same way investment banking did. An aesthetic collapse across institutions, ideas, and founders paired with the world's tiring of tech has recently accelerated this shift.
Some thoughts on the cascade, the generational divide, Anthropic vs. OpenAI, what comes next, and more.
David Lang retweeted
1/ Today @stripepress publishes one of my favorite books to date: Maintenance: Of Everything, Part One by @stewartbrand, about the unglamorous yet civilizationally important work of maintenance and repair.
press.stripe.com/maintenance…
Out now: press.stripe.com/maintenance…
@stewartbrand's Maintenance: Of Everything, Part One—about the continuous repair work that keeps complex systems intact, spanning stories from a round-the-world sailboat race, to the restoration of the Statue of Liberty, to the Model T’s rise.
There is a restaurant in downtown Berkeley called Comal, which has good Mexican food. I recommend it.
I suggest you go, if you can, to observe for yourself that they have SOLVED the pesky restaurant noise problem.
You can hear everyone at your table clearly, without anyone straining their voice, all while the whole place maintains a lively background buzz of conversation and ambiance.
It's a technical and design marvel. I hope they figure out how to make these tools cheap and ubiquitous.
Here are the technical details: meyersound.com/news/comal/
The owner was a former manager of Phish, which explains things.
A perennial must-read publication.
Also, Asimov Press a great example of what a small, excellent group can accomplish. More companies should try turning their marketing budgets into a crack editorial team.
Today marks a major milestone at @AsimovPress: Our two-year anniversary!
We formally launched the magazine in December 2023; a tiny team of two operating from inside @AsimovBio.
In 2024, we published 49 articles, including a History of the Micropipette, an argument about why Mitochondria Are Alive, and quite a bit of science fiction.
In 2025, we grew our team slightly, bringing on a freelance Art Director (@EllaWD_PhD) and copyeditor (Devon Balwit), as well as some more contributing writers. This year, we published 72 articles, most of which are quite lengthy and took months to research. Thanks to funding from @AsteraInstitute and @stripe for making this possible.
I'm very grateful to be working with this team and these writers, all of whom are deeply serious about producing the best possible work. @XanderBalwit is so committed, for example, that she will occasionally drive to a writer's house and work with them in person, for hours or days, until a draft comes together.
Some memorable pieces from this year (all can be found by searching our website):
- Edwin Cohn and the Harvard Blood Factory
- Gregor Mendel's Vanishing Act
- The Battle for Better Air
- Healing My Family's Future
- The Nobel Duel
- Making the Centrifuge
- A Visual Guide to Genome Editors
- The Uncertain Origins of Aspirin
- The First Weight Loss Drugs
- How to Scale Proteomics
- What We Find in the Sewers
- A Liver on Ice
- What Makes an Experiment Beautiful?
Thanks for reading and supporting our work. See you in 2026 :)
14
1,968
The scientific apprenticeship model needs reinvention.
Sam and the team are running more than a program—it's also a prime example of something many companies could and should be offering.
We are opening applications for our 2026 cohort of FutureHouse AI-for-Science Independent Postdoctoral Fellows! Apply our AI tools to specific problems in biology and biochemistry, in collaboration with world-leading academic labs:
--$125,000 annual stipend.
--Access to all tools developed by FutureHouse and Edison Scientific at scale, including Kosmos and several as-of-yet unreleased agents, with under-the-hood access to them to specialize them for your workflows.
--Receive dedicated software engineering support.
--1 year with possible 1 year extension.
Even more exceptional co-advisors than last year. Deadline for applications is February 13th, 2026. Link in next post.
In my opinion, most conferences should *not* be annual events.
Many should happen just once—don’t ruin the memory. Others should adopt the Olympic model of every four years (or another meaningful interval).
One of the most interesting conferences I’ve ever attended was OceanObs, which takes place every decade. The decadal cadence created a unique dynamic: scientists had generational discussions, knowing many wouldn’t be around to see the final results of their deliberations and decisions. Important infrastructure was created from that way of working, like the Argo network of ocean sensors.
The COP conferences for climate change should take note.
Too many annual conferences are a recipe for burnout, including for the organizers. I understand the economic pull for organizers to feed their engine, but I suspect there is a better way: fewer high-quality events, each with added anticipation and vigor.
Here they are, steadily building towards 2029:
oceanobs29.net/
149


























