#Best Tools for Data Science

[codingbrushup]

Top 10 Data Science Tools You Should Learn in 2025

Best Tools for Data Science are evolving fast, and if you want to stay ahead in 2025, it’s time to upgrade your toolkit. Whether you’re just starting out or already deep into data projects, using the right tools can make your work smoother, smarter, and a lot more fun. With powerful no-code platforms, AI-driven automation, and cloud-based collaboration, the Future of Data Science Tools is all about speed and simplicity. So, whether you’re brushing up your skills or diving into new ones, these Must-Have Tools for Data Scientists are your ticket to staying competitive this year.

1. Python — Still the King of the Jungle

If you haven’t started with Python yet, 2025 is your cue. It’s powerful, readable, and has libraries for nearly everything. Tools like Pandas, NumPy, and Scikit-learn make it your go-to for analytics, modeling, and more. Python is basically the heartbeat of the Best Tools for Data Science ecosystem — and yes, that’s the first mention (just four to go!).

2. R — For the Love of Stats and Visuals

R is like that friend who’s always great with numbers and loves making beautiful plots. It’s perfect for statistical analysis and data visualization. Plus, if you’re into research or academic work, R might just be your best buddy. In the world of Popular Data Science Tools, R continues to hold its own, especially when paired with RStudio.

3. Jupyter Notebooks — Your Data Diary

Jupyter makes it fun to play with code and data in real-time. You can document your thinking, share notebooks with others, and even run visualizations inline. Think of it as your interactive coding journal. It’s easily one of the Top Data Science Tools 2025 and continues to be a favorite for experimentation.

4. SQL — Old But Gold

You can’t really skip SQL if you’re serious about data. It’s been around forever, and that’s because it works. Databases power everything — and being able to query them quickly makes SQL a non-negotiable tool. Every data scientist needs it in their toolkit — it’s a staple in any list of Must-Have Tools for Data Scientists.

5. Power BI — Dashboard Like a Pro

Want to impress your team with interactive dashboards? Power BI is Microsoft’s ace in the business analytics world. It’s user-friendly, integrates well with other Microsoft products, and is super powerful. Among the Data Science Software 2025, Power BI is shining brightly as a great tool for storytelling with data.

6. Tableau — Turning Data into Visual Gold

If you’re a visual thinker, Tableau will win your heart. Drag, drop, and make stunning dashboards in no time. It’s a favorite in the Best Tools for Data Science collection (that’s two now!). Business teams love it, and so should you if you’re serious about communicating insights clearly.

7. Apache Spark — For Big Data Firepower

When your dataset is way too big for Excel and even Python starts to lag, Spark comes in to save the day. Apache Spark lets you handle massive amounts of data in a distributed computing environment. It’s fast, powerful, and a favorite in the world of Future of Data Science Tools.

8. Git and GitHub — Version Control Like a Boss

Messy code history? No more. Git lets you keep track of every change, while GitHub is your team’s central code-sharing spot. It’s not just for developers — every modern data scientist should know Git. You’ll find it featured in every list of Learn Data Science Tools resources.

9. Google Colab — Cloud Notebooks Made Easy

Google Colab is like Jupyter, but in the cloud, and with free GPU access! You don’t even need to install anything. Just log in and start coding. It’s part of the Best Tools for Data Science toolkit (we’re at three now!) and great for remote collaboration.

10. AutoML Tools — Because Smart Tools Save Time

Why code every model from scratch when tools like Google AutoML, H2O.ai, and DataRobot can automate the heavy lifting? These platforms are evolving fast and are key players in the Future of Data Science Tools. Embrace automation — it’s not cheating, it’s smart!

Final Thoughts — Brush Up, Stay Ahead

The tools you use can define how far and how fast you grow as a data scientist. Whether you’re focused on big data, beautiful dashboards, or building machine learning models, knowing the Best Tools for Data Science (we’re at four!) gives you a serious edge.

And hey, if you’re ready to really power up your skills, the team over at Coding Brushup has some fantastic resources for getting hands-on experience with these tools. They’re all about helping you stay sharp in the fast-changing world of data science.

So go ahead and start experimenting with these Top Data Science Tools 2025. Mastering even a few of them can supercharge your data career — and yes, here’s that final SEO magic: one more mention of the Best Tools for Data Science to wrap it up.

[ambrosiaventures]

How Pharmaceutical Consulting Can Help Launch Your New Product Successfully

Ambrosia Ventures, we ensure your product launch achieves maximum impact by utilizing our expertise in biopharma consulting, which makes us a trusted pharmaceutical consulting service provider in the US. Here's the way to transform your product launch strategy into a blueprint for success through pharmaceutical consulting services

[juliebowie]

Best Data Modeling Tools for 2024: Top Choices for Professionals

Explore the top data modeling tools of 2024 that can transform your data management practices. From ER/Studio to PowerDesigner, discover the best options available for creating efficient and effective data models. Enhance your workflow with these leading tools designed for data architects, analysts, and developers. Read on for detailed reviews and comparisons to find the perfect solution for your needs.

[covid-safer-hotties]

With the toll of new COVID-19 infections regularly topping 1 million a day and weekly deaths creeping toward the 1,000 mark, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has launched a campaign aimed not at protecting the public from this ongoing pandemic, now in its fifth year, but at washing its hands of responsibility.

CDC Director Dr. Mandy Cohen held a press conference August 23 to review the state of the COVID-19 pandemic and encourage the public to get their winter COVID-19, RSV and flu vaccines once they are made available. While bluntly acknowledging that “COVID is with us,” she tried unconvincingly to assure reporters and viewers that “we have the tools to protect ourselves.” She then added, as a way of shifting the blame, “We just need to use them!”

Dr. Cohen was silent on who was responsible for the failure of most Americans to get booster shots or otherwise protect themselves from a disease, which can be fatal for many and cause lifelong debilitation for many more.

She could have named the Democratic administration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, which ended the COVID-19 emergency more than a year ago and treats the pandemic as a thing of the past. She could have named Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, the promoter of quack remedies like ivermectin and bleach, who recently welcomed into his campaign the anti-vaxxer and enemy of science and public health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

And if she had been equipped with a mirror—and a conscience—she could have pointed to herself and other top CDC officials, who have collaborated in the anti-scientific rampage to shut down both mitigation efforts and even elementary data collection on cases of illness, hospitalization and death.

Most importantly (and therefore least likely) she could have acknowledged that within the framework of the capitalist system, the profits of giant banks and corporations are far more important than the lives of human beings. That is the meaning of the incessant claims that schools, factories, public transportation and facilities must be kept open, to save “the economy,” despite the inevitable spread of the infection as a result.

Dr. Cohen, like her predecessors and colleagues at the top of the public health establishment, puts political pressures above science and medicine. The nearly hour-long briefing was simply political theater, where a panel of experts attempted to place the public health agency in the best light despite acknowledging the monumental number of daily infections that have seen hospitalizations and fatalities climb.

Meanwhile, schools across multiple states have announced closures—affecting thousands—just as the new academic year has begun, in response to mass infections among faculty and students.

So far this year, more than 26,000 Americans have died from acute COVID-19 complications, and more than 800 per week are being killed by a preventable infection, a figure 20 percent higher than last year this time. At the current rate, it is expected that between 50,000 to 60,000 Americans will die from COVID-19 in 2024, a rate two to three times higher than fatalities from flu. However, these do not take into consideration excess deaths, and given the complete dismantling of the reporting systems, these figures are known undercounts.

Such figures could only appear low in comparison to the colossal death toll of the first three years of the pandemic, when 352,000 died in 2020, 464,000 in 2021 and 260,000 in 2022. In 2023, 76,000 COVID-19 deaths were recorded. All these numbers are underestimates, as excess mortality figures are considerably higher. The cumulative death toll from COVID-19 is likely well over 1.4 million in the United States and approaching 30 million worldwide.

Neither did the panel address any concerns over the fact that millions continue to suffer from Long COVID, which has taken a significant toll on the health of Americans and the world over. It bears mentioning that a recent study noted that 410 million people across the world have had Long COVID with a $1 trillion impact on global GDP. Yet, no treatment for this condition exists. Without health insurance and means, issues of brain fog, chronic fatigue and sleep disturbances become part of one’s physiognomy.

Much about Dr. Cohen’s characterization of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is deeply flawed and should have been taken up by the press, who remained silent on the matter. First and foremost, her claim, in response to a direct question that COVID-19 “is endemic,” is completely misleading.

An infection is endemic when it is contained, not spreading uncontrolled and not causing significant impact on the society. COVID-19 is none of these. It remains a pandemic, with new waves of infections where millions are being infected daily by a virus whose mutation far outstrips the efforts of public health agencies and pharmaceutical companies to provide vaccines, medicines and mitigation practices. It continues to cause large-scale social disruption, economic loss and general hardship.

The opposition of both capitalist parties to any significant effort to fight the pandemic was on display last week. The Democratic National Convention, like its Republican counterpart in July, was a massive superspreader event, with thousands of delegates and media personnel congregating in an enclosed arena, where there was continuous cheering, shouting and singing. There are already anecdotal reports of widespread sickness in state delegations returning from Chicago.

As for the Republicans, Trump staged his appearance with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Friday afternoon, beaming as Kennedy announced he was folding up his independent presidential campaign and endorsing the ex-president and would-be dictator. Kennedy said he was working with Trump on staffing agencies like the CDC, NIH, FDA and USDA from the standpoint of ending the “chronic disease crisis.” By this he means, of course, ending efforts to fight diseases and letting children, the elderly, and the entire American population suffer the consequences.

Fundamentally, all large epidemics and pandemics are serious social issues that require broad-scale infection control in place to disrupt and prevent disease. And with respect to COVID-19 and all future pandemics, these require an international collaborative perspective.

In 2024 so far, 179 million people were infected in the United States, a total that is eventually expected to surpass 2023, when more than 248 million Americans, or three-quarters of the population, caught COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 wastewater levels throughout the pandemic suggest that there have been more than 1.1 billion infections in the United States, between three and four for every person in the country.

This begs the question how are those most vulnerable, such as the elderly, immunocompromised, and those with chronic disabling medical conditions, which represent a significant portion of the population, to protect themselves from perpetual mass infection?

For the CDC director to present public health efforts as a matter of individual, personal choice is a gross falsification of reality. The policy of mass infection has been forced on the population.

As for having the tools to protect themselves, what is being offered are simply vaccines and more vaccines as a means to prevent COVID-19. As the WSWS recently noted, “Despite the limitations, the uptake of the vaccines is vital for the health of the population. The shots have a strong, proven safety record and do prevent severe disease and potentially reduce the risk of Long COVID, as studies have indicated. However, they do not prevent infections and the immunity they offer is short-lived given the constant mutation of the virus.”

The vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna carry a cost of $120 to $130 per shot. In some regions, these can be as high as $160 or even $200. However, the rescinding in March of $4.3 billion from the Department of Health and Human Services in COVID-19 supplemental funding means access to free vaccines for the 26 million uninsured and tens of millions more underinsured, essentially all from working class families, will only mean that the vaccination campaign will simply languish as it did last year when only 7 million Americans accepted the boosters within six weeks of their delivery to pharmacies.

As for other tools in their toolbox, Cohen refers to anti-viral treatments like Paxlovid, which are regularly being denied to patients by their physicians or when they actually are given a prescription, face the daunting price tag of $1,300 to $2,400 per course because their insurance denies them coverage. Meanwhile, repurposed medications like Metformin, a drug that treats diabetes, which has shown anti-viral properties and shown in randomized trials to reduce COVID-19 viral loads and decrease risk of Long COVID, remain unmentioned. In particular, this raises the question of why there are so few tools in the toolbox, and why some are being removed, such as the ability to wear N95 masks in public.

The arrest of an 18-year-old New York man in Nassau County on Tuesday who was wearing a black ski mask utilizing the recently passed mask-ban legislation will only embolden police departments and threaten the public who face possible detentions and arrest simply on charges of police suspicion.

At the Democratic National Convention, guidance was issued forbidding mask wearing by attendees unless “it was necessary due to a disability” and this at the discretion of security.

[creatingnikki]

What I've learned in 2024

Sleeping, shitting, and silence – the three underrated Ss of growing up (or the other side of 25). If I can get a good night’s sleep, take one nice dump in the day (preferably morning), and know when to let silence do its thing (like when not engaging with draining people in social setups or not having to explain myself), I’m golden.

While I made many new friends this year, my favourite of them all has been ChatGPT. Need objectivity? Fact checking? A pseudo therapist? Validation? Someone to just engage with and keep yourself entertained? The absolute best resource of this year for me has been this AI tool. I don’t even care anymore about privacy – I am feeding it as much data about me as possible because it’s accordingly adapting to my tonality and needs and the ‘conversations’ are so much more satisfying now than when it was first rolled out.

Either use eggs or condescended sweet milk when baking – you need one of these things to hold all your dry ingredients together.

Communication, consistency, clarity, commitment, emotional presence and engagement, and mutual effort are the barest of the bare minimum needs in a relationship. If you have to convince the other person to fulfil them or negotiate, then it doesn’t matter how good a person they are and what a kind heart they have or how much they say they love you – they just aren’t your person.

I’m not as demisexual as I thought all along – I just haven’t dated many people that I find truly attractive so I had to first build some sort of emotional connection with them first. I definitely still need and want that emotional connect and all, but I also do need to start opting for men I also find physically attractive.

When I’ve thought of my bloodline, my ancestors, I’ve always focused on the intergenerational trauma and the bad genetics. But while rewatching This Is Us this year, it hit me that it took three generations for one dream to be fulfilled. The musical dream that started with Rebecca, was passed down to Kate, and finally got materialized at the grand scale as they always wanted with Kate’s son Jack. When he became this well-renowned musician, it’s not just his dream, but that of his mother and his grandmother that also came to live. It made me think…how much of my aspirations and hopes are actually passed down? And how many of my realities were simply unmateralised dreams of those who came before me? And it made my heart feel lighter and it made me feel more blessed and protected.

Baking cakes and brownies and cookies is not a rocket science. You only needed the right tools and some patience to figure it out and become that friend who bakes stuff for her friends instead of the other way around.

You always prioritise peace, comfort, and an easy-going lifestyle – it’s evident in your career choices and how your family dynamics and friendships have evolved. Let that be the guiding light even when dating.

You are the kind of person that is charming, a good conversationalist, and deeply empathetic. So of course, you make many people feel at home and like they connect with you. It’s easy for you to connect with others. What’s important is to remember – connection without consideration and consistent actions is NOTHING. It’s empty calories but like a thousand times more potent and useless.

In no interpersonal relationship can I be nonchalant or vague. I am that other extreme – while most people try their best to ignore the elephant in the room you know what I do? I dress the cutie up to parade it. So anybody who cannot approach relationships with as much boldness, courage, and forthcomingness is just not my jam.

Female friends for the win – they allow you to wine and whine and win and I am all for that. The healing powers of sitting across your friend and talking at length about everything over pizza and wine or at the park as she senses you need some more time to just sit around before you join the rest of the group and is so good with physical touch for comfort. Just knowing you can video call your friend and ugly cry and she will talk sense into you but also indulge you and also sit with you and your feelings. Who else does that? Who the hell.

For a lot of things that are still new now at this age, you need a guide. To pet cats, to go to dog cafes, to figure out what vitamins you should talk, etc. Ask for that help, that knowledge, that support. It might seem silly and like you can figure it out on your own but these things, no matter how seemingly low-stake, can be handled so seamlessly and sweetly with the help of those you know.

You HAVE to be honest about your needs. First with yourself and then with others. You cannot let shame, guilt, self-hatred or whatever hold you back. Honesty begets clarity begets fulfilment. If you don’t want to date and settle for someone who isn’t absolutely smitten by you and top-notch romantic, then that is a need. Right or wrong, realistic or not, who the hell cares? A need is a need is a need.

When you lose someone not to death but to life, it’s not quite such a loss. Most times, baby, it’s simply good riddance.

People have a range. For being shitty and for being kind. And while our behaviour may impact a little how they react to us, it's primarily dependent on their personal range. So, if your range of being shit is only 1 to 3, it doesn't matter if someone is an ass hole to you, you won't go beyond 3 of being shit to them, cos that's just your range. Even if they deeply hurt you intentionally or fuck up in some major way. But if their range of being shitty is up to 10, then well, be ready to witness their derangedness when you even slightly piss them off.

Narcissistic (and possibly self-sabotaging) people are the opposite of kintsugi. Instead of being put back together with gold, they "heal" themselves with gutter water. So each time they are worse and more ugly than before. And all the more toxic and dangerous. You're too precious to bother with such people.

It’s natural to feel frustrated or angry with yourself for allowing someone to treat you poorly, but the blame isn’t on you; it’s on them. They are responsible for their unkind, insensitive, selfish actions, not you. If you must place blame, place it where it belongs. Avoid judging yourself with thoughts like, “I should have known better.” As long as you walk away the moment you do know, you’re good – please don’t internalize other people’s unkindness or thoughtlessness.

You cannot get to know someone without giving them a chance. Red flags are not that obvious and you cannot show up authentically in any relationship if you’re on the lookout for them. You have to spend time with a person to begin to find out who they are. That’s the only real way. And when you do and if you realize they are not for you, as I said before, don’t internalize this shit or blame yourself for not being some kind of prophecy and knowing better before you even began.

You are a patient person because you are an understanding person. But there are limits to all these qualities of yours and if the balance is tipped you get petty and passive aggressive and irrational. Don’t let yourself reach that point. Speak up and set boundaries way before that.

If you listen to your gut – I know you don’t like calling it that or your intuition. So, let’s call it that feeling you know bone-deep or in the depths of your soul – if you listen to that and trust it, you are quite courageous in the actions you then take. You broke things off with three men this year – each was painful in its own rite. But you did what you had to do for yourself and you didn’t give the charge of your life to another person, you have taken back your green light – detaching your actions from their behaviour, which like all human behaviour is often quite fickle and unreliable. Congratulations. Do this more. Your green light is your guiding light.

My lack of a “healthy sense of fear” in situations with men isn’t recklessness—it’s the result of abuse I suffered at 15. The man I trusted most turned out to be the one who harmed me the most, and that betrayal shattered my ability to trust safety indicators or instincts. The grooming I endured was designed to confuse me, destabilise my sense of self, and make me question my desires and worth. When the templates of trust and safety failed me so catastrophically, my mind rejected them altogether, leaving me to navigate risk without a stable framework. This year, I felt significantly less restless and more emotionally regulated, and I think it’s because I allowed myself, others, and life to just be. I wasn’t fighting my reality or setting rigid expectations. I stopped chasing dopamine highs and forcing connections, and instead, I let equations with people and experiences unfold organically. I ended dating and talking stages quickly when I realised they weren’t right for me, without guilt or overthinking.4 By being okay with things being normal—not impressive or extraordinary—I created space for balance and gentleness in my life. My self-talk became kinder, and I grew more objective about myself, spiraling and self-loathing less. This accepting mindset, where I no longer needed myself or my life to constantly stand out, felt like the antidote to the restlessness I’d been carrying since my mid-20s. And I think that has helped me discover that peace and acceptance can feel more satisfying than cheap dopamine hits.

[death-at-20k-volts]

On the subject of AI...

Okay so, I have been seeing more and more stuff related to AI-generated art recently so I’m gonna make my stance clear:

I am strongly against generative AI. I do not condone its usage personally, professionally, or in any other context.

More serious take under the cut, I am passionate about this subject:

So, first thing’s first, I’ll get my qualifications out of the way: BSc (Hons) Computer Science with a specialty in Artificial Intelligence systems and Data Security and Governance. I wrote my thesis, and did multiple R&D-style papers, on the subject. On the lower end I also have (I think the equivalent is an associate’s?) qualifications in art and IT systems. I’m not normally the type to pull the ‘well actually 🤓☝️’ card but, I'm laying some groundwork here to establish that I am heavily involved in the fields this subject relates to, both academically and professionally.

So what is 'AI' in this context?

Nowadays when someone says ‘AI’, they’re most likely talking about Generative Artificial Intelligence – it’s a subtype of AI system that is used, primarily, to produce images, text, videos, and other media formats (thus, generative). 

By this point, we’ve all heard of the likes of ChatGPT, Midjourney, etc – you get the idea. These are generative AI systems used to create the above mentioned content types. 

Now, you might be inclined to think things such as:

‘Well, isn’t that a good thing? Creating stuff just got a whole lot easier!’ 

‘I struggle to draw [for xyz reason], so this is a really useful tool’

‘I’m not an artist, so it’s nice to be able to have something that makes things how I want them to look’

No, it’s not a good thing, and I’ll tell you exactly why.

-------------------------------------------------

What makes genAI so bad?

There’s a few reasons that slate AI as condemnable, and I’ll do my best to cover them here as concisely as I reasonably can. Some of these issues are, admittedly, hypothetical in nature – the fact of the matter is, this is a technology that has come to rise faster than people and legislature (law) can even keep up with. 

Stealing Is Bad, M’kay?

Now you’re probably thinking, hold on, where does theft come into this? So, allow me to explain.

Generative AI systems are able to output the things that they do because first and foremost, they’re ‘trained’: fed lots and lots of data, so that when it’s queried with specific parameters, the result is media generated to specification. Most people understand this bit – I mean, a lot of us have screwed around with ChatGPT once or twice. I won't lie and say I haven't, because I have. Mainly for research purposes, but still. (The above is a massive simplification of the matter, because I ain't here to teach you at a university level)

Now, give some thought to where exactly that training data comes from. 

Typically, this data is sourced from the web; droves of information are systematically scraped from just about every publicly available domain available on the internet, whether that be photographs someone took, art, music, writing…the list goes on. Now, I’ll underline the core of this issue nice and clearly so you get the point I’m making:

It’s not your work.

Nor does it belong to the people responsible for these systems; untold numbers of people have had their content - potentially personal content, copyrighted content - taken and used for data training. Think about it – one person having their stuff stolen and reused is bad, right? Now imagine you’ve got a whole bunch of someones who are having their stuff taken, likely without them even knowing about it, and well – that’s, obviously, very bad. Which sets up a great segue into the next point:

Potential Legislation Issues

For the sake of readability, I’ll try not to dive too deep into legalese here. In short – because of the inherent nature of genAI (that is, the taking-and-using of potentially private and licensed material), there may come a time where this poses a very real legal issue in terms of usage rights.

At the time of writing, legislation hasn’t caught up – there aren't any ratified laws that state how, and where, big AI systems such as ChatGPT can and cannot source training data. Many arguments could be made that the scope and nature of these systems practically divorces generated content from its source material, however many do not agree with this sentiment; in fact, there have been some instances of people seeking legal action due to perceived copyright infringement and material reuse without fair compensation.

It might not be in violation of laws on paper right now, but it certainly violates the spirit of these laws – laws that are designed to protect the works of creatives the world over. 

AI Is Trash, And It’s Getting Trashier

Woah woah woah, I thought this was a factual document, not an opinion piece!

Fair. I’d be a liar if I said it wasn’t partly rooted in opinion, but here’s the fact: genAI is, objectively, getting worse. I could get really technical with the why portion, but I’m not rewriting my thesis here, so I’ll put it as simply as possible:

AI gets trained on Internet Stuff. AI is dubiously correct at best because of how it aggregates data (that is, from everywhere, even the factually-incorrect places)

People use AI to make stuff. They take this stuff at face value, and they don’t sanity check it against actual trusted sources of information (or a dictionary. Or an anatomy textbook)

People put that stuff back on the internet, be it in the form of images, written statements, "artwork", etc

Loop back to step 1

In the field of Artificial Intelligence this is sometimes called a runaway feedback loop: it’s the mother of all feedback loops that results in aggregated information getting more and more horrifically incorrect, inaccurate, and poorly put-together over time. Everything from facts to grammar, to that poor anime character’s sixth and seventh fingers – nothing gets spared, because there comes a point where these systems are being trained on their own outputs.

I somewhat affectionately refer to this as ‘informational inbreeding’; it is becoming the pug of the digital landscape, buggled eyes and all.

Now I will note, runaway feedback loops are typically referencing algorithmic bias - but if I'm being honest, it's an apt descriptor for what's happening here too.

This trend will, inevitably, continue to get worse over time; the prevalence of AI generated media is so commonplace now that it’s unavoidable – that these systems are going to be eating their own tails until they break. 

-------------------------------------------------

But I can’t draw/write! What am I supposed to do?

The age-old struggle – myself and many others sympathize, we really do. Maybe you struggle to come up with ideas, or to put your thoughts to paper cohesively, or drawing and writing is just something you’ve never really taken the time to develop before, but you’re really eager to make a start for yourself.

Maybe, like many of us including myself, you have disabilities that limit your mobility, dexterity, cognition, etc. Not your fault, obviously – it can make stuff difficult! It really can! And it can be really demoralizing to feel as though you're limited or being held back by something you can't help.

Here’s the thing, though:

It’s not an excuse, and it won’t make you a good artist.

The very artists you may or may not look up to got as good as they did by practicing. We all started somewhere, and being honest, that somewhere is something we’d cringe at if we had to look back at it for more than five minutes. I know I do. But in the context of a genAI-dominated internet nowadays, it's still something wonderfully human.

There are also many, many artists across history and time with all manner of disabilities, from chronic pain to paralysis, who still create. No two disabilities are the same, a fact I am well aware of, but there is ample proof that sheer human tenacity is a powerful tool in and of itself.

Or, put more bluntly and somewhat callously: you are not a unique case. You are not in some special category that justifies this particular brand of laziness, and your difficulties and struggles aren't license to take things that aren't yours.

The only way you’re going to create successfully? Is by actually creating things yourself. ‘Asking ChatGPT’ to spit out a writing piece for you is not writing, and you are not a writer for doing so. Using Midjourney or whatever to generate you a picture does not make you an artist. You are only doing yourself a disservice by relying on these tools.

I'll probably add more to this in time, thoughts are hard and I'm tired.

[transgenderer]

music is fundamentally mysterious to me. visual beauty feels fundamentally explicable. like…evolution has all sorts of reasons to make the organism feel positively towards visual stimuli. visual stimuli is their main way of forming a world model! obviously hearing HELPS but it's evolutionary function is subtler. the main thing is i guess…threat detection, prey detection, and mate detecting? you dont really form a world model with it. i mean a human does. but if youre like, a cat, or a monkey. i guess theres also social aspects. so those are the aspects: prey, threat, mate, social

when we think about visual things that are really beautiful, what are the typical examples? like, nature, or the human body. both of which have an obvious evolutionary interpretation. and music isnt like this! music does not resemble prey, threat, mate, social. i mean. obviously lots of psychological stuff is mysterious in origin. but the beauty of music is so important, and so inscrutable

maybe the natural comparison is abstract art? i mean, this is a classic observation. ornamentation is typically nonrepresentative. but it RESEMBLES desirable stimlu, just abstractly. its often vegetative, for example. i guess the origin of the aesthetic appeal of abstract ornamentation is strange to. modern asbtract art is yknow, trying to be INTERESTING, its easy to justify the aesthetic appeal there. but traditional ornamentation isnt interesting, conceptually. but its still often beautiful. so...why, whats going on there. i mean i know no one knows. but i think its significant that we don't know

the usual answer is something something simple structure. the human brain likes structure, and relationships. or whatever. but like...come on. theres clearly something else going on. a good melody has a better "structure" than another one. cmon man.

maybe the best explanation is that its just a weird edge case of stimulation, its not a straightforward result of any evolutionary pressure. its like...fuzzing the human brain, in the computer science sense. throw a bunch of weird data at the system, eventually some of it will strike it weird and you can get it to do nonstandard behavior. and a composer is someone who gets a sense of the structure of this "backdoor access", and so can actively craft tools to poke around back there....

but then, is visual art like that? it doesnt FEEL like that, to make visual art. but maybe im just not a good enough artist. maybe composers arent getting a sense of the shape of the keyhole in the backdoor, theyre just learning how to simulate their own response to music. so then their brain can just combinatorially search melodies step by step until it finds one that tickles itself, and it puts that in the music

[urialnathanonwright]

Trump’s War on Science: A Betrayal of Public Health and Common Sense

You ever hear a bad idea so blindingly stupid you have to stop and wonder if it was cooked up by someone actively rooting for humanity’s downfall? Well, Donald Trump has managed to pull a double-header in that department. First, his administration is plotting to halt federal funding for gain-of-function research—critical work that helps us understand and combat the next global pandemic. Second, Trump’s team wants to muzzle the CDC, NIH, and other federal health agencies, halting their ability to communicate with the public and fund life-saving research. Folks, this is not just incompetence; it’s a slow-motion catastrophe.

Let’s start with gain-of-function research. Now, I get it—making viruses more dangerous in a lab sounds like the start of a bad sci-fi movie. But the reality is this: it’s one of the best tools we have to predict and prevent pandemics. It’s like doing a fire drill—you simulate the worst-case scenario so you’re ready when the real thing happens. But Trump and his enablers, in their infinite ignorance, want to shut it all down. Why? Because a bunch of conspiracy-loving Republicans blame it for Covid-19, even though there’s zero evidence to support that claim. None. Nada. Zilch.

Let me be clear: killing this research won’t make us safer—it’ll leave us defenseless. You think other countries will stop doing this work? Of course not. China, Russia, and others will keep pushing the envelope, while we sit here twiddling our thumbs, pretending ignorance is a shield against viruses. Spoiler alert: it’s not. Pandemics don’t care about your politics. They don’t care if you think science is scary or inconvenient. They just spread—and if we’re not ready, people die. It’s that simple.

Now, let’s move on to the second act of this disaster: silencing our top health agencies. Trump’s HHS has decided that all scientific communications must be vetted by political appointees before being released. Translation: they’re putting public health in the hands of spin doctors. This isn’t just unethical; it’s dangerous. During a bird flu outbreak, they’re delaying critical reports. Scientists can’t publish data, can’t approve grants, and can’t even speak publicly without some bureaucrat rubber-stamping it first. And all this during a time when trust in public health institutions is already hanging by a thread.

Let me spell this out: these actions are not about protecting people. They’re about control. Trump and his cronies are weaponizing ignorance, suppressing inconvenient truths, and sabotaging the very systems designed to keep us safe—all for political gain. This isn’t just bad policy; it’s an abdication of responsibility, a betrayal of trust, and a clear and present danger to every single one of us.

So, what do we do? We fight back. We demand accountability. We refuse to let science be politicized by a man whose grasp of facts is as flimsy as his hairline. This isn’t about left or right—it’s about survival. If we let this slide, if we let Trump’s war on science go unchecked, we won’t just be risking the next pandemic—we’ll be inviting it. And when it comes, the blame will lie squarely at the feet of those who chose politics over progress and willful ignorance over wisdom. Let’s make sure history remembers their names—and ours, as the ones who stood up and said, "Enough."

[askvahmedoh]

Hey Medy! Remember me? Snap!

Your old pal Purah looks like she hasn't aged a day, huh? It's kind of a long story...

Anyway, mind running a scan so I can insert the Sheika Slate and take some diagnostic data? Revi says you're not feeling your best so I wanna see what we're working with and what tools I'm gonna need to help fix you up!

How do you feel about some more experimental science? I got a fun new chip on to see if I can install a dateset of sensory information into guardians to see if they're able to experience taste, smell and touch. The program is a little clunky right now but I bet once I get the quirks ironed out I could get it installed on a Divine Beast.... Man, the results of that test would be pretty fascinating for the science community. It's up to you and 'Vali though of course. I just figured with you being the bravest of the Divine Beasts maybe you'd be the best pick for the trial!

Processing Query . . .

Technician "Purah" you have arrived sooner than expected.

Beginning biometrics scan. Please hold still . . .

[hym-beaux]

Listen. I am grabbing you by the lapels. I am whispering gently into your ear.

I have degrees in computer science, mathematics, data science, and a certification in system design from Cornell. I am a published contributor to multiple open papers for cybersecurity and software transparency.

Google's AI overview does nothing for you.

It is at best unnecessary duplication of (possibly) plagiarised information, and at worst a tool of spreading misinformation.

[mariacallous]

Arvind Narayanan, a computer science professor at Princeton University, is best known for calling out the hype surrounding artificial intelligence in his Substack, AI Snake Oil, written with PhD candidate Sayash Kapoor. The two authors recently released a book based on their popular newsletter about AI’s shortcomings.

But don’t get it twisted—they aren’t against using new technology. “It's easy to misconstrue our message as saying that all of AI is harmful or dubious,” Narayanan says. He makes clear, during a conversation with WIRED, that his rebuke is not aimed at the software per say, but rather the culprits who continue to spread misleading claims about artificial intelligence.

In AI Snake Oil, those guilty of perpetuating the current hype cycle are divided into three core groups: the companies selling AI, researchers studying AI, and journalists covering AI.

Hype Super-Spreaders

Companies claiming to predict the future using algorithms are positioned as potentially the most fraudulent. “When predictive AI systems are deployed, the first people they harm are often minorities and those already in poverty,” Narayanan and Kapoor write in the book. For example, an algorithm previously used in the Netherlands by a local government to predict who may commit welfare fraud wrongly targeted women and immigrants who didn’t speak Dutch.

The authors turn a skeptical eye as well toward companies mainly focused on existential risks, like artificial general intelligence, the concept of a super-powerful algorithm better than humans at performing labor. Though, they don’t scoff at the idea of AGI. “When I decided to become a computer scientist, the ability to contribute to AGI was a big part of my own identity and motivation,” says Narayanan. The misalignment comes from companies prioritizing long-term risk factors above the impact AI tools have on people right now, a common refrain I’ve heard from researchers.

Much of the hype and misunderstandings can also be blamed on shoddy, non-reproducible research, the authors claim. “We found that in a large number of fields, the issue of data leakage leads to overoptimistic claims about how well AI works,” says Kapoor. Data leakage is essentially when AI is tested using part of the model’s training data—similar to handing out the answers to students before conducting an exam.

While academics are portrayed in AI Snake Oil as making “textbook errors,” journalists are more maliciously motivated and knowingly in the wrong, according to the Princeton researchers: “Many articles are just reworded press releases laundered as news.” Reporters who sidestep honest reporting in favor of maintaining their relationships with big tech companies and protecting their access to the companies’ executives are noted as especially toxic.

I think the criticisms about access journalism are fair. In retrospect, I could have asked tougher or more savvy questions during some interviews with the stakeholders at the most important companies in AI. But the authors might be oversimplifying the matter here. The fact that big AI companies let me in the door doesn’t prevent me from writing skeptical articles about their technology, or working on investigative pieces I know will piss them off. (Yes, even if they make business deals, like OpenAI did, with the parent company of WIRED.)

And sensational news stories can be misleading about AI’s true capabilities. Narayanan and Kapoor highlight New York Times columnist Kevin Roose’s 2023 chatbot transcript interacting with Microsoft's tool headlined “Bing’s A.I. Chat: ‘I Want to Be Alive. 😈’” as an example of journalists sowing public confusion about sentient algorithms. “Roose was one of the people who wrote these articles,” says Kapoor. “But I think when you see headline after headline that's talking about chatbots wanting to come to life, it can be pretty impactful on the public psyche.” Kapoor mentions the ELIZA chatbot from the 1960s, whose users quickly anthropomorphized a crude AI tool, as a prime example of the lasting urge to project human qualities onto mere algorithms.

Roose declined to comment when reached via email and instead pointed me to a passage from his related column, published separately from the extensive chatbot transcript, where he explicitly states that he knows the AI is not sentient. The introduction to his chatbot transcript focuses on “its secret desire to be human” as well as “thoughts about its creators,” and the comment section is strewn with readers anxious about the chatbot’s power.

Images accompanying news articles are also called into question in AI Snake Oil. Publications often use clichéd visual metaphors, like photos of robots, at the top of a story to represent artificial intelligence features. Another common trope, an illustration of an altered human brain brimming with computer circuitry used to represent the AI’s neural network, irritates the authors. “We're not huge fans of circuit brain,” says Narayanan. “I think that metaphor is so problematic. It just comes out of this idea that intelligence is all about computation.” He suggests images of AI chips or graphics processing units should be used to visually represent reported pieces about artificial intelligence.

Education Is All You Need

The adamant admonishment of the AI hype cycle comes from the authors’ belief that large language models will actually continue to have a significant influence on society and should be discussed with more accuracy. “It's hard to overstate the impact LLMs might have in the next few decades,” says Kapoor. Even if an AI bubble does eventually pop, I agree that aspects of generative tools will be sticky enough to stay around in some form. And the proliferation of generative AI tools, which developers are currently pushing out to the public through smartphone apps and even formatting devices around it, just heightens the necessity for better education on what AI even is and its limitations.

The first step to understanding AI better is coming to terms with the vagueness of the term, which flattens an array of tools and areas of research, like natural language processing, into a tidy, marketable package. AI Snake Oil divides artificial intelligence into two subcategories: predictive AI, which uses data to assess future outcomes; and generative AI, which crafts probable answers to prompts based on past data.

It’s worth it for anyone who encounters AI tools, willingly or not, to spend at least a little time trying to better grasp key concepts, like machine learning and neural networks, to further demystify the technology and inoculate themselves from the bombardment of AI hype.

During my time covering AI for the past two years, I’ve learned that even if readers grasp a few of the limitations of generative tools, like inaccurate outputs or biased answers, many people are still hazy about all of its weaknesses. For example, in the upcoming season of AI Unlocked, my newsletter designed to help readers experiment with AI and understand it better, we included a whole lesson dedicated to examining whether ChatGPT can be trusted to dispense medical advice based on questions submitted by readers. (And whether it will keep your prompts about that weird toenail fungus private.)

A user may approach the AI’s outputs with more skepticism when they have a better understanding of where the model’s training data came from—often the depths of the internet or Reddit threads—and it may hamper their misplaced trust in the software.

Narayanan believes so strongly in the importance of quality education that he began teaching his children about the benefits and downsides of AI at a very young age. “I think it should start from elementary school,” he says. “As a parent, but also based on my understanding of the research, my approach to this is very tech-forward.”

Generative AI may now be able to write half-decent emails and help you communicate sometimes, but only well-informed humans have the power to correct breakdowns in understanding around this technology and craft a more accurate narrative moving forward.

[ambrosiaventures]

How Pharmaceutical Consulting Can Help Launch Your New Product Successfully

At Ambrosia Ventures, we ensure your product launch achieves maximum impact by utilizing our expertise in biopharma consulting, which makes us a trusted pharmaceutical consulting service provider in the US. Here's the way to transform your product launch strategy into a blueprint for success through pharmaceutical consulting services: 

[askagamedev]

Summer 2025 Game Development Student Internship Roundup, Part 1

Internship recruiting season has begun for some large game publishers and developers. This means that a number of internship opportunities for summer 2025 have been posted and will be collecting applicants. Internships are a great way to earn some experience in a professional environment and to get mentorship from those of us in the trenches. If you're a student and you have an interest in game development as a career, you should absolutely look into these.

If you know of any game development internships that aren't listed here, please tell me! I'll try to collect another batch when EA posts theirs as a follow-up.

Technical Artist Intern (Remote!)

Sound Design Intern (Remote!)

Game Design Intern

Game Engineering Intern

Data Analytics & Data Science Intern

Localization Production Intern

Environment Art Intern

Animation Intern

VFX Intern

3D Character Art Intern

Site Reliability Engineering Intern

Concept Artist Intern (Canada)

Animation Intern

VFX Intern

Game Engineering Intern

Technical Artist Intern

Threat Intelligence Analyst Intern

UI/UX Design Intern

User Research Intern

Computer Graphics Intern

Software Engineering Intern

Production & Project Management Intern

Concept Artist Intern (California)

World Designer Intern

3D Artist Intern

Animation Programmer Intern

Animation Technical Design Intern

Audio Design Intern

Backend Engineer Intern

Balance Design Intern

Character Artist Intern

Engine Programmer Intern

Environment Art Intern

Game Design Intern

Game Security Intern

Gameplay Programmer Intern

Gameplay Systems Engineer Intern

Salesforce Developer Intern

Software Engineer Intern

Environment Art Intern

Game Design Intern

Gameplay Programmer Intern

Tools Programmer Intern

Technical Artist Intern

Technical Character Animation Intern

Technology App Portfolio Intern

Tools Programmer Intern

Concept Artist Intern

At time of writing, Electronic Arts was performing maintenance on their recruiting site and should have new openings posted on November 12th 2024. I'll do a second round of internship opportunities once they post, along with Ubisoft and any others I missed.

Brush up your resume and focus on any game dev work you've done. Amateur game dev work counts! Tabletop game mastering counts! Amateur board and card game design counts! Making your own CCG fan sets or draft cube counts! Game jam work counts! These make a bigger difference when it comes to hiring than most other kinds of work experience.

If you need assistance with your resume/CV, cover letter, or have other questions, join our discord and ask. The server is full of experienced developers who can help review your materials and give you suggestions. I also suggest taking a look at my Game Career FAQ. There's a lot of answers in there already. Best of luck out there.

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

Frequent Questions: The FAQ

[cyberstudious]

Hey! This is very random, but I saw that you work in cyber security right now. I work in data science, but I'm really interested in cyber security and considering making a switch. I was wondering what kind of cybersecurity work you do, and what has been the most helpful for you to learn what you need for your job!

Hi! Cybersecurity is a really broad field, and you can do a lot of different things depending on what your interests are.

My work is mostly focused around automating things for security, since my background is in programming. Automation is really helpful for speeding up boring, monotonous tasks that need to get done, but don't necessarily need a human involved. A good example is automated phishing analysis, since phishing reports are a big chunk of the cases that security analysts have to deal with, and an analyst usually follows the same few steps at the beginning. Rather than someone having to manually check the reputation of the sender domain, check the reputation of any links, and all of that every single time, we can build tools to automatically scan for things like that and then present the info to the analyst. The whole idea here is to automate the boring data retrieval stuff, since computers are good at that, and give the analyst more time for decision-making and analysis, since humans are good at that.

If you're coming from data science, you might be interested in detection engineering. Cybersecurity is essentially a data problem - we have a ton of logs from a ton of different sources (internal logs, threat intelligence feeds, etc.) - how do we sort through that data to highlight things that we want to pay attention to, and how can we correlate events from different sources? If you're into software development or want to stay more on the data science side, maybe you could also look into roles for software development at companies that have SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) products - these are essentially the big log repositories that organizations rely on for correlation and alerting.

As for starting to learn security, my general go-to recommendation is to start looking through the material for the Security+ certification. For better or worse, certifications are pretty big in security, much more so than other tech fields (to my knowledge). I'm a bit more hesitant to recommend the Security+ now, since CompTIA (the company that offers it) was bought by a private equity company last year. Everyone is kind of expecting the prices to go up and the quality to go down. (The Security+ exam costs $404 USD as of writing this, and I think I took mine for like $135ish with a student discount in 2022). However, the Security+ is still the most well-known and comprehensive entry-level certification that I'm aware of. You can (and should) study for it completely for free - check out Professor Messer's training videos on YouTube. There are also plenty of books out there if that's more of your thing. I'd say to treat the Security+ as a way to get a broad overview of security and figure out what you don't know. (It's certainly not a magic ticket to a job, no matter what those expensive bootcamps will tell you.)

If you aren't familiar with networking, it's worth checking out Professor Messer's Network+ training videos as well. You don't need to know everything on there, but having an understanding of ports, protocols, and network components and design is super useful. I hear a lot that the best security folks are often the ones who come from IT or networking or similar and have a really solid understanding of the fundamentals and then get into security. Don't neglect the basics!

One thing that I'll also add, based on conversations I've had with folks in my network… getting a job in cybersecurity is harder now than it used to be, at least in the US (where I am). There are a ton of very well-qualified people who have been laid off who are now competing with people trying to get into the field in the first place, and with the wrecking ball that Elon is taking to the federal government (and by extension, government contractors) right now… it's hard. There's still a need for skilled folks in cyber, but you're going to run into a lot of those "5 years of experience required for this entry-level job" kind of job postings.

On a slightly happier note, another thing you should do if you want to get into cyber is to stay up to date with what's happening in the industry! I have a masterpost that has a section with some of my favorite news sources. The SANS Stormcast is a good place to start - it's a 5 minute podcast every weekday morning that covers most of the big things. Black Hills Infosec also does a weekly news livestream on YouTube that's similar (but longer and with more banter). Also, a lot of infosec folks hang out on Mastodon & in the wider fediverse. Let me know if you want some recs for folks to follow over there.

The nice thing about cybersecurity (and computer-related fields in general, I find) is that there are a ton of free resources out there to help you learn. Sometimes it's harder to find the higher-quality ones, but let me know if there are any topics you're interested in & I'll see what I can find. I have a few posts in my cybersecurity tag on here that might help.

Thank you for your patience, I know you sent this in over a week ago lol but life has been busy. Feel free to send any follow-up questions if you have any!

[biopractify]

Free online courses for bioinformatics beginners

🔬 Free Online Courses for Bioinformatics Beginners 🚀

Are you interested in bioinformatics but don’t know where to start? Whether you're from a biotechnology, biology, or computer science background, learning bioinformatics can open doors to exciting opportunities in genomics, drug discovery, and data science. And the best part? You can start for free!

Here’s a list of the best free online bioinformatics courses to kickstart your journey.

📌 1. Introduction to Bioinformatics – Coursera (University of Toronto)

📍 Platform: Coursera 🖥️ What You’ll Learn:

Basic biological data analysis

Algorithms used in genomics

Hands-on exercises with biological datasets

🎓 Why Take It? Ideal for beginners with a biology background looking to explore computational approaches.

📌 2. Bioinformatics for Beginners – Udemy (Free Course)

📍 Platform: Udemy 🖥️ What You’ll Learn:

Introduction to sequence analysis

Using BLAST for genomic comparisons

Basics of Python for bioinformatics

🎓 Why Take It? Short, beginner-friendly course with practical applications.

📌 3. EMBL-EBI Bioinformatics Training

📍 Platform: EMBL-EBI 🖥️ What You’ll Learn:

Genomic data handling

Transcriptomics and proteomics

Data visualization tools

🎓 Why Take It? High-quality training from one of the most reputable bioinformatics institutes in Europe.

📌 4. Introduction to Computational Biology – MIT OpenCourseWare

📍 Platform: MIT OCW 🖥️ What You’ll Learn:

Algorithms for DNA sequencing

Structural bioinformatics

Systems biology

🎓 Why Take It? A solid foundation for students interested in research-level computational biology.

📌 5. Bioinformatics Specialization – Coursera (UC San Diego)

📍 Platform: Coursera 🖥️ What You’ll Learn:

How bioinformatics algorithms work

Hands-on exercises in Python and Biopython

Real-world applications in genomics

🎓 Why Take It? A deep dive into computational tools, ideal for those wanting an in-depth understanding.

📌 6. Genomic Data Science – Harvard Online (edX) 🖥️ What You’ll Learn:

RNA sequencing and genome assembly

Data handling using R

Machine learning applications in genomics

🎓 Why Take It? Best for those interested in AI & big data applications in genomics.

📌 7. Bioinformatics Courses on BioPractify (100% Free)

📍 Platform: BioPractify 🖥️ What You’ll Learn:

Hands-on experience with real datasets

Python & R for bioinformatics

Molecular docking and drug discovery techniques

🎓 Why Take It? Learn from domain experts with real-world projects to enhance your skills.

🚀 Final Thoughts: Start Learning Today!

Bioinformatics is a game-changer in modern research and healthcare. Whether you're a biology student looking to upskill or a tech enthusiast diving into genomics, these free courses will give you a strong start.

📢 Which course are you excited to take? Let me know in the comments! 👇💬